data science
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 due to impact on finance, healthcare, e-commerce
Evidence type: support letters, articles, traffic analytics
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“they do not address his proposed undertaking and do not sufficiently explain how his proposed endeavor ... offer benefits that extend beyond his employer, their clients, and users of their digital marketing platforms to impact his field more broadly.”
page not extractedOpen source PDF
Petitioner argued: alignment with U.S. government initiatives
Evidence type: references to OMB Memorandum, etc.
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated that the Beneficiary's proposed work activities would impact the U.S. economy, national security, finance, healthcare, or e-commerce sector more broadly”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: economic and job creation impact
Evidence type: support letters, expert economic analysis
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record does not contain sufficient supporting evidence”
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 support letters, articles, traffic analytics insufficient to establish that proposed endeavor has national importance due to impact on finance, healthcare, e-commerce. 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?