artificial intelligence and machine…

EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision

2026-04-02·DISMISSED·IN RE: 42091410

Underlying petition: DENIED · Service Center Operations (SCOPS)

Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar

Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance

PASS

Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance

Evidence type: letters of support, documentation of broader implications

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

he has established that he meets the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.

Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF

Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor

FAIL

Petitioner argued: citation record demonstrates impact

Evidence type: Google Scholar profiles, Clarivate Analytics data

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

the Petitioner's comparison of his citation number in his field with information regarding citation in the larger field of computer science does not sufficiently establish the level of his success or impact

page not extractedOpen source PDF

Petitioner argued: well positioned to advance proposed endeavor

Evidence type: curriculum vitae, doctoral degree, published work, citation metrics, letters of support

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor

Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: future research projects will be pursued

Evidence type: statement of intent, employment letter

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

he does not elaborate on how their future AI research projects will be funded

Decision PDF, p. 7Open source PDF

Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits

NOT_DISCUSSED

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 Google Scholar profiles, Clarivate Analytics data insufficient to establish that citation record demonstrates 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?
See similar decisionsHow this data was built