mathematics
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
PASSPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: letters of recommendation, government initiatives, publications
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED
“we determine that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the Petitioner's endeavor is of national importance based on the potential impact it could have on his field and other initiatives that are important to maintain the United States' competitiveness.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: well-positioned to advance proposed endeavor
Evidence type: PhD, publications, citations, employment
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish the long-term feasibility of his proposed endeavor or evidence demonstrating he has the means or financial support to undertake his proposed research in the United States”
Decision PDF, p. 7Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
NOT_DISCUSSEDPetitioner argued: waiver would benefit the United States
Evidence type: none
USCIS finding: NOT_DISCUSSED
“we reserve further analysis regarding whether the record establishes the third Dhanasar prong.”
Decision PDF, p. 8Open 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 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
- On Prong 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's PhD, publications, citations, employment insufficient to establish that well-positioned to advance proposed endeavor. 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?