data storage and data protection
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · SCOPS
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance because it advances cybersecurity and data protection, which are critical to national security and government initiatives.
Evidence type: government initiatives, employer's client list, project descriptions
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner did not sufficiently clarify his specific proposed endeavor but only emphasizes the importance of the cybersecurity and data protection field.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance due to its potential economic impact on the data storage and software engineering industries.
Evidence type: market size statistics
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner also did not submit specific and targeted economic impacts resulting from his work but refers to large revenues generated by the data storage and software engineering industries.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open 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 government initiatives, employer's client list, project descriptions insufficient to establish that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance because it advances cybersecurity and data protection, which are critical to national security and government initiatives.. 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?