restaurant franchising and operations
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 company has introduced significant innovations in its industry.
Evidence type: Industry analysis, CEO statements
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record, however, lacks sufficient independent evidence that the products the Petitioner cites represent nationally important innovations in its industry.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: There is unmet demand for Asian cuisine in the U.S.
Evidence type: Market research study
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the market research study does not demonstrate U.S. demand for the company's restaurants.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor would create jobs in economically depressed areas.
Evidence type: Franchise agreements, zip code index
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not sufficiently support the Petitioner's claim that it would create "many" jobs in economically depressed areas.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor would create thousands of jobs for U.S. workers and benefit local economies, particularly in economically depressed areas.
Evidence type: Projections, franchise agreements, economic research group formula
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed endeavor has national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open 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 Industry analysis, CEO statements insufficient to establish that the company has introduced significant innovations in its industry.. 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?