construction management
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Texas Service Center
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: endeavor would have significant potential for broad economic impact
Evidence type: business plan
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the plan's staffing and wage projections ... do not demonstrate the endeavor's significant potential for broad economic impact”
page not extractedOpen source PDF
Petitioner argued: endeavor would address labor shortages
Evidence type: industry articles
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner did not explain how his endeavor would address the labor shortages highlighted in the articles”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: endeavor aligns with national need for affordable housing and sustainable growth
Evidence type: assertions
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner does not provide evidence to demonstrate that the impact to affordable housing, sustainable growth, or the environment would be so significant as to result in substantial positive effects”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSProng 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 insufficient to establish that endeavor would have significant potential for broad economic 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?