cybersecurity
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Service Center Operations
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: his work contributes to 'the improved security and safety of autonomous systems'
Evidence type: personal statements, recommendation letters, journal articles
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the evidence in the record, including his personal statements, recommendation letters, and his two journal articles, does not show that his research in AI safety, secure communications, and autonomous transportation has such widespread impact or influence.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: his publications have been cited frequently
Evidence type: Google Scholar profile
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the evidence does not demonstrate that the published work that the Petitioner has contributed to has been cited frequently by independent researchers at a rate that is high relative to others in the field.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: his work has received significant funding from NSF and NuRamp
Evidence type: emails
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the evidence in the record does not support his assertion. Instead of providing an official letter of award from NSF, the Petitioner provided an email dated February 19, 2025, requesting demographic data from 'NSF-supported project.'”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Prong 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 personal statements, recommendation letters, journal articles insufficient to establish that his work contributes to 'the improved security and safety of autonomous systems'. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- On Prong 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's Google Scholar profile insufficient to establish that his publications have been cited frequently. 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?