offshore energy projects
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
PASSPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance
Evidence type: information about oil and gas industry, evidence of adaptive technologies
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED
“Because the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor, he has established that he meets the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSPetitioner argued: well positioned to advance proposed endeavor
Evidence type: advanced education, specialized training, two decades of experience, evidence of recognition
USCIS finding: ACCEPTED
“Because the Petitioner has demonstrated that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor, he has established that he meets the second prong of the Dhanasar framework.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
FAILPetitioner argued: waiver would be beneficial to the United States
Evidence type: expert letters and reports, letters of endorsement
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner has not established eligibility under the third prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
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. USCIS officers exercise discretion on facts that are never fully captured in a written decision.
This decision turned on the balancing test for waiving a job offer and labor certification. 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 3 (balancing the waiver's benefits), USCIS found the petitioner's expert letters and reports, letters of endorsement insufficient to establish that waiver would be beneficial to the United States. 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?