transportation engineering
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_DISCUSSEDPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: research description
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“SCOPS' national importance analysis states that the Petitioner "did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertion that the prospective impact of continuing his work as a systems engineer consultant in the field of information technology and software development rises to the level of national importance."”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSProng 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
FAILPetitioner argued: waiver would benefit the United States
Evidence type: business plan details
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the decision states that the Petitioner has not "offered sufficient information and evidence to illustrate the number of individuals his business plans to hire, train and support" and concludes, "[t]here is no evidence to illustrate that the rate of pay he intends to pay his current or prospective employees would have 'substantial positive economic effects' such as revenue or job creation."”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open 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 business plan details insufficient to establish that waiver would benefit 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?