Oracle database management…
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 has national importance because it aligns with national priorities and has significant potential to employ U.S. workers.
Evidence type: business plan, letters of recommendation, additional letter from economist
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“These projections do not indicate that the Petitioner's company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers, even in an economically depressed area. The business plan also forecasts a net profit of $632 in the first year, increasing to $109,771 in the third year. This amount of profit does not indicate that the Petitioner's company would have substantial positive economic effects on a level indicative of national importance.”
page not extractedOpen 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 business plan, letters of recommendation, additional letter from economist insufficient to establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance because it aligns with national priorities and has significant potential to employ U.S. workers.. 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?