Electrical Engineering
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Service Center Operations (SCOPS)
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
PASSProng 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: Citation counts demonstrate impact
Evidence type: citation record
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner does not specify how many citations for each of these individual articles were self-citations by her or her coauthors.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Future plans to pursue research career
Evidence type: personal statement
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“Without sufficient evidence demonstrating the means or financial support to undertake her proposed research in the United States after graduation from her current Ph.D. program, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her plan for future activities renders her well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Peer review activity demonstrates standing
Evidence type: peer review service
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that this single instance of participation in the widespread peer review process and type of review assignment represent a record of success in her field”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Petitioner's research has broader implications and she is well positioned
Evidence type: letters of support
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“While the Petitioner's research helped improve understanding of power control strategies for wind turbines, she has not demonstrated the extent to which her specific findings are being utilized to advance wind energy systems' performance.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Petitioner's publications in notable venues demonstrate success
Evidence type: publications
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“That a publication bears a high journal ranking or impact factor is reflective of the publication's overall citation rate. It does not, however, show the influence of any particular author or otherwise demonstrate how an individual's research represents a record of success in their field.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 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 whether the person was well-positioned to advance the endeavor. 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 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's citation record insufficient to establish that citation counts demonstrate impact. 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?