artificial intelligence (AI) driven…
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: work extends beyond the company and impacts the broader field of AI and manufacturing technology
Evidence type: letters from employer
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the authors do not sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's specific projects atl Istand to have an impact that extends beyond the company and its clients to influence the Petitioner's field of endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance due to its impact on critical U.S. industries
Evidence type: expert opinion and recommendation letters
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“While these letters are generally supportive and positive factors, they do not offer sufficient, detailed, and concrete examples of how the Petitioner's endeavor has the potential for broad and measurable implications for the country beyond impacting his employer and its clients.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: endeavor will lead to creation of high-quality jobs
Evidence type: petitioner's statement
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not contain evidence demonstrating that his proposed work will result in job creation beyond speculative or indirect effects.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: will publish detailed research and disseminate through peer-reviewed journals
Evidence type: petitioner's statement in response to RFE
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner did not previously identify dissemination of research as a component of his proposed endeavor and were only introduced for the first time in response to SCOPS' RFE.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
NOT_DISCUSSEDPetitioner argued: co-authored a temporally aware knowledge graph system used by the U.S. Department of Defense
Evidence type: petitioner's statement
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not provided evidence detailing the extent of his individual contribution to the project as compared to the contributions of other collaborators.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 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 letters from employer insufficient to establish that work extends beyond the company and impacts the broader field of AI and manufacturing technology. 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?