thermal management systems
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: endeavor not confined to single employer
Evidence type: letter from university advisor
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letter only discusses the Petitioner's past work and his personal attributes... The advisor does not mention any future collaborating work with the Petitioner.”
page not extractedOpen source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: patent and publication
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“evidence of the Petitioner's past experience, even if successful, does not sufficiently establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: endeavor aligns with national initiatives
Evidence type: government reports
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
page not extractedOpen source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: letters of recommendation
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the authors' focus is on the impact of the Petitioner's prior work and his qualifications, not the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open 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 letter from university advisor insufficient to establish that endeavor not confined to single employer. 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?