trucking and financial consulting
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Service Center Operations
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance because it will revolutionize load shipping services and enhance efficiency in the trucking industry.
Evidence type: business plan, letters of recommendation, contracts
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor as contemplated under the Dhanasar framework by a preponderance of the evidence”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers and substantial positive economic effects.
Evidence type: Form 1099-NEC tax information, DCI data
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the evidence is insufficient to establish the endeavor will have the 'significant potential to employ U.S. workers or ... [have] other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area' as contemplated by Dhanasar”
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 business plan, letters of recommendation, contracts insufficient to establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance because it will revolutionize load shipping services and enhance efficiency in the trucking industry.. 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?