artificial intelligence in business…
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
FAILPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance
Evidence type: professional plan, expert opinion letter, letters of support
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not establish the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of national importance”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor will lead to job creation and economic benefits
Evidence type: petitioner's assertions
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record lacks specificity and support for these assertions”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor will have national or global implications
Evidence type: letters of support
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letters lack corroborating evidence and lean on the Petitioner's past experience as support for their claims”
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 professional plan, expert opinion letter, letters of support insufficient to establish that proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. 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?