public relations consulting
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: The proposed endeavor is nationally important because it serves the retail industry.
Evidence type: expert opinion letters
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the opinion letters are of little probative value as they primarily discuss the impact of the retail sector in general and repeat the Petitioner's claims about his experience and the stated objectives of his endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Past achievements in Brazil demonstrate potential impact of the proposed endeavor.
Evidence type: letters of recommendation
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letters do not discuss the proposed endeavor or provide evidence of its potential prospective impact.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: The proposed endeavor has national importance due to economic impact and job creation.
Evidence type: personal statement with charts
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the evidence in the record does not support the information in the charts provided.”
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 expert opinion letters insufficient to establish that the proposed endeavor is nationally important because it serves the retail industry.. 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?