civil/structural engineering
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 because it is in STEM field and construction industry, aligns with national initiatives, addresses talent shortages
Evidence type: personal statement, articles of formation, industry articles, expert letters
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“SCOPS reviewed the Petitioner's evidence, including his personal statement, articles of formation for his business, industry articles, and expert letters and determined they did not establish the national importance of his endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor will contribute to sustainable growth of airport facilities and reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Evidence type: appeal brief
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“it is not apparent how the Petitioner's services would have global or national implications to the field beyond the individuals or entities using them.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: business plan supports intention to hire a dozen workers from distressed communities
Evidence type: business plan
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“We will therefore not consider it for the first time on appeal.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open 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 personal statement, articles of formation, industry articles, expert letters insufficient to establish that proposed endeavor has national importance because it is in STEM field and construction industry, aligns with national initiatives, addresses talent shortages. 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?