physical chemistry
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
FAILPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: industry reports and articles
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“this evidence does not establish the proposed endeavor's impact on the problem.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: letters of recommendation support national importance
Evidence type: letters of recommendation
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letters do not sufficiently establish the proposed endeavor's prospective impact and thus do not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has substantial merit
Evidence type: industry reports and articles
USCIS finding: ACCEPTED
“We conclude the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor will have economic impact
Evidence type: assertion
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to support this assertion and thus we cannot conclude the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: funding from NSF, NASA, Army Research Office indicates national importance
Evidence type: grant funding evidence
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“As the record does not establish this funding is for his proposed endeavor, this evidence does not relate to the national importance of his proposed endeavor but relates to his prior experience.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: work aligns with national initiatives and CETs
Evidence type: policy manual reference
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not demonstrate how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will advance these CETs to result in national or global implications within a particular field.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
NOT_DISCUSSEDProng 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 industry reports and articles insufficient to establish that proposed endeavor has national importance. 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?