microbiology and bioinformatics

EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision

2025-08-15·DISMISSED·IN RE: 39123980

Underlying petition: DENIED ·

Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar

Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance

PASS

Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor

FAIL

Petitioner argued: The Petitioner has a plan for future research and is seeking post-doctoral positions.

Evidence type: emails documenting job search

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT

Without sufficient evidence offunding or other means to support his planned research after receiving his Ph.D., the Petitioner has not established that his plan renders him well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor, or that potential employers are interested in his work.

Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: The Petitioner's peer review activity demonstrates his reputation.

Evidence type: peer review evidence

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

The Petitioner has not shown that the quantity or quality of his participation in the widespread peer review process represents a record of success or is otherwise indicative that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.

Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: The Petitioner's research has been cited and is of interest to other researchers.

Evidence type: citation record, reference letters

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

This evidence confirms that other researchers have used the Petitioner's published research findings to further their own work, but does not support its relative success in the context of the field of microbiology.

Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF

Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits

FAIL

Petitioner argued: His skills justify a waiver despite qualified U.S. workers.

Evidence type: assertion

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

Here, the Petitioner has not shown that at this point in his career he has achieved that level of expertise.

Decision PDF, p. 7Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: There is a national shortage of researchers with his skills.

Evidence type: assertion

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

Regarding the asserted national shortage of those with his combination of skills, such a shortage does not, by itself, satisfy the third prong.

Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF

What 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 emails documenting job search insufficient to establish that the Petitioner has a plan for future research and is seeking post-doctoral positions.. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
  • On Prong 3 (balancing the waiver's benefits), USCIS found the petitioner's assertion insufficient to establish that his skills justify a waiver despite qualified U.S. workers.. 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?
See similar decisionsHow this data was built