civil engineering
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: Letters of recommendation demonstrate the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
Evidence type: letters of recommendation
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letter of recommendation the Petitioner submitted in response to SCOPS' RFE consists of unsubstantiated, conclusory, and subjective statements and it focuses on how the Petitioner's research aligns with that of the letter's author and affects his research group, rather than having broader implications within the field of civil engineering or any other particular field, it provides little help for us to determine a fact in issue and it bears minimal probative value for establishing whether the proposed endeavor may have national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance due to its applications in STEM fields.
Evidence type: publications providing generalized information
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the publications do not explain how the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake may have national or even global implications within the field of civil engineering, or any other particular field, such as those resulting from certain manufacturing advances.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance based on NSF-funded research contributions.
Evidence type: NSF grant award abstract
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“That the Petitioner contributed to two of seven publications fonded by an NSF grant that lists another individual as a principal researcher bears limited probative value regarding the significance of the Petitioner's contributions to the research fonded by the grant, and regarding whether the proposed endeavor may have the type of broader implications contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong.”
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 letters of recommendation insufficient to establish that letters of recommendation demonstrate the national importance of the 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?