drug delivery systems / biological…

EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision

2026-02-02·DISMISSED·IN RE: 40796111

Underlying petition: DENIED ·

Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar

Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance

PASS

Petitioner argued: proposed research has substantial merit and national importance

Evidence type: personal statement, peer-reviewed articles, citation records, industry reports, letters of support

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED

the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed research endeavor

Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF

Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor

FAIL

Petitioner argued: citation record demonstrates influence

Evidence type: citation record

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

citation metrics alone are not determinative of his ability to advance the proposed research endeavor in the future.

Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: well positioned to advance proposed endeavor

Evidence type: academic records, publications, citations, letters, patent application

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

we conclude that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.

Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF

Petitioner argued: funding from NIH etc. demonstrates support

Evidence type: letters describing funded projects

USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT

the record lacks sufficient detail regarding the Petitioner's special role or responsibilities in securing these funds.

Decision PDF, p. 7Open source PDF

Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits

NOT_DISCUSSED

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 whether the person was well-positioned to advance the endeavor. 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 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's citation record insufficient to establish that citation record demonstrates influence. 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?
See similar decisionsHow this data was built