immigration law
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 would stand out from what already exists in the immigration law field, and as a result it has national importance
Evidence type: business plan, statements, endorsement letters
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“SCOPS evaluated the Petitioner's business plan, statements, and endorsement letters, and still found the record lacking a sufficient indication of the law firm's broader implications, or his explanation of how the proposed endeavor implicates matters rising to a level of national importance beyond the typical occupational duties of a lawyer.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: support letters confirm how the business plan will materialize and will serve the needs of the 'impressive [] number of people who arrive in the country and who require adequate judicial support and who do not have the resources to do so.'
Evidence type: support letters
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“when evaluating national importance, USCIS focuses on the specific endeavor that must be of national importance-here a small immigration law firm serving the immigrant community-rather than evaluating the work that occurs in the Petitioner's occupation or industry.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: endeavor is of national importance as it will effectuate a positive impact on the economy
Evidence type: appeal brief
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“Lacking from the record is an indication of the extent to which the Petitioner's endeavor would have substantial positive economic effects rather than incremental or nominal impacts.”
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 business plan, statements, endorsement letters insufficient to establish that proposed endeavor would stand out from what already exists in the immigration law field, and as a result it 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?