artificial intelligence ethics
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Texas Service Center
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
NOT_DISCUSSEDPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: citations to law and executive orders
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: NOT_DISCUSSED
“The Director's decision again did not specifically address the support letters submitted by professors and researchers from the Petitioner's university, her personal statements, law and government sources she cited, nor the additional expert opinion provided on motion.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: letters from professors and researchers
USCIS finding: NOT_DISCUSSED
“the Director did not specifically articulate the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, nor did they discuss in detail any of the evidence provided by the Petitioner”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: expert letter
USCIS finding: NOT_DISCUSSED
“The Director's decision again did not specifically address the support letters submitted by professors and researchers from the Petitioner's university, her personal statements, law and government sources she cited, nor the additional expert opinion provided on motion.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSPetitioner argued: well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Evidence type: not specified
USCIS finding: ACCEPTED
“the Director concluded that the Petitioner demonstrated that she met the second prong of Dhanasar”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
FAILPetitioner argued: waiver would benefit the United States
Evidence type: not specified
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that it would be beneficial to waive the requirement of the job offer”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open 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 not specified 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?