machine learning and single-cell RNA…
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: The recommendation letter shows the endeavor has national importance.
Evidence type: recommendation letter
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the recommendation letter addresses generalized information rather than explaining how the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake may have national importance”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The employment confirmation letter shows the endeavor has national importance.
Evidence type: employment confirmation letter
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the employment confirmation letter does not provide further information regarding the broader implications of the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance because it will improve cancer diagnosis and protect Americans from fraud.
Evidence type: personal statement
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the personal statement ... provides generalized information regarding ... rather than focusing on the specific endeavor's potential prospective impact.”
page not extractedOpen source PDF
Petitioner argued: The FTC press release shows the endeavor has national importance.
Evidence type: press release
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the FTC press release does not address how the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake may have indicia of national importance”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open 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 recommendation letter insufficient to establish that the recommendation letter shows the 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?