project management and consulting
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: The endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects through job creation and tax revenue.
Evidence type: business plan projections
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner did not, however, provide a sufficient basis for these projections, nor are the numbers corroborated by probative evidence sufficient to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the company will have a substantial positive economic effect within any field.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance because it will stimulate local economic development, create sustainable small businesses, and improve quality of life in rural areas.
Evidence type: business plan, articles, letters
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner, however, did not specifically describe how he would undertake an endeavor of a scale that would reach the level of 'substantial positive economic effects' contemplated by Dhanasar.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
NOT_DISCUSSEDProng 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
NOT_DISCUSSEDWhat this decision can’t tell you
This decision comes from a case that was denied and then appealed. Every case here is in that position — it cannot be used to estimate an overall approval rate, and it cannot predict the outcome of any individual case, including yours. USCIS officers exercise discretion on facts that are never fully captured in a written decision.
This decision turned on national importance. Describe your own work and see which decisions discussed the same issue.
Describe your situation →Related decisions
Questions this raises for your lawyer
- On Prong 1 (substantial merit & national importance), USCIS found the petitioner's business plan projections insufficient to establish that the endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects through job creation and tax revenue.. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- What in my own case most resembles the specific facts USCIS focused on in this decision?
- Would additional expert-opinion evidence have changed the outcome here, based on what USCIS said was missing?