materials engineering
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
PASSProng 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: Interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals in his proposed endeavor
Evidence type: letters of recommendation and citations
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not established the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals in his proposed endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Petitioner has a record of success in related or similar efforts
Evidence type: publications and citations
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“None of his publications or citations addressed scale formation in steel production or otherwise referenced steel production.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Petitioner has made progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor
Evidence type: invitation to steel research meeting
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“he did not submit evidence of any corresponding publication or other documentation of steel-related research he presented at this meeting”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open 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 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 letters of recommendation and citations insufficient to establish that interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals in his 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?