environmental law and policy
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: The proposed endeavor will have positive economic and societal impacts for the nation.
Evidence type: generalized claims
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“she has not specifically explained, much less quantified, how any economic impact resulting from these activities would be substantial enough to rise to the level of national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor will advance environmental science through education and advocacy.
Evidence type: vague assertions
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“Beyond these vague assertions, however, she has provided little detail regarding how she specifically plans to accomplish such broad objectives through her endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance due to its alignment with U.S. governmental priorities and international commitments to combatting climate change.
Evidence type: industry articles and reports
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the articles and reports do not mention or discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor specifically, including how it might impact the field more broadly and rise to the level of national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Support letters establish the proposed endeavor's national importance.
Evidence type: support letters
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“they do not discuss the Petitioner's endeavor or specific impact thereof: including any potential broader implications of her work.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open 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 generalized claims insufficient to establish that the proposed endeavor will have positive economic and societal impacts for the nation.. 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?