telecommunications 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: The Petitioner claimed his expertise aligns with BEAD program goals and his goal is to bridge the digital gap and boost connectivity nationwide.
Evidence type: general assertions, industry articles, support letters, professional plan
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner's description of his proposed endeavor was too ill-defined and vague to establish his eligibility under the Dhanasar prongs.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: The Petitioner emphasized his skills, expertise, and past experience.
Evidence type: skills, expertise, past experience
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“he has not demonstrated that he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
FAILPetitioner argued: The Petitioner argued that the evidence demonstrated his eligibility under the third Dhanasar prong.
Evidence type: evidence of eligibility
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“and that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirements.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
What 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 general assertions, industry articles, support letters, professional plan insufficient to establish that the Petitioner claimed his expertise aligns with BEAD program goals and his goal is to bridge the digital gap and boost connectivity nationwide.. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- On Prong 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's skills, expertise, past experience insufficient to establish that the Petitioner emphasized his skills, expertise, and past experience.. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- On Prong 3 (balancing the waiver's benefits), USCIS found the petitioner's evidence of eligibility insufficient to establish that the Petitioner argued that the evidence demonstrated his eligibility under the third Dhanasar prong.. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?