veterinary pathology
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
NOT_DISCUSSEDProng 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILProng 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
NOT_DISCUSSEDOther findings in the decision
Findings on the underlying EB-2 classification and other issues, distinct from the three Dhanasar prongs above.
“the translator did not certify that the translations were accurate and complete or that she was competent to translate from the foreign language into English”
p. 3
“we will withdraw SCOPS' conclusion on the second prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework”
p. 5
“The credential evaluation report from International Academic Credential Evaluations, Inc. does not state the entry requirement for the Medico Veterinario Con Grado de Licenciatura.”
p. 5
What 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. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officers exercise discretion on facts that are never fully captured in a written decision.
This decision turned on whether the person was well-positioned to advance the endeavor. Describe your own work and see which decisions discussed the same issue.
Describe your situation →Related decisions
Questions this raises for your lawyer
- Prong 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor) was not established here. What does my case need to show on this element?
- 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?