Date of Decision: September 15, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Mechanical Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Mechanical Engineering Researcher
Field: Mechanical Engineering
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit and National Importance: The petitioner demonstrated that his research in mechanical engineering, specifically on increasing the efficiency of systems and examining the interaction of water with newly-designed surfaces, has substantial merit.
Criteria Not Met:
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show he was well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. Although he submitted documentation of his academic credentials and research activities, these did not convincingly demonstrate his capacity to influence or advance the field of mechanical engineering significantly.
- Beneficial to the United States to Waive the Requirements of the Labor Certification Process: The petitioner failed to show that, on balance, waiving the labor certification requirement would be beneficial to the United States. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the national interest in his contributions.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to conduct experiments and analyze data from devices to find fundamental laws and increase the efficiency of systems. His goal was to extend his research to new surfaces and examine their interactions with water, aiming to increase knowledge and design optimized systems.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit due to its potential to address critical issues in mechanical engineering. However, the endeavor’s national importance was not adequately demonstrated.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner argued that his work would contribute to the United States by enhancing the body of knowledge in mechanical engineering. However, he did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that his contributions would justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted his curriculum vitae, academic credentials, and descriptions of his research projects. However, these documents did not adequately demonstrate his ability to significantly impact his field. The letters from colleagues and professionals praised his work but did not provide concrete examples of his research being implemented or having a substantial influence.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s assertions about his influence and impact were not fully supported by the evidence provided. The documentation did not clearly show that his work had been widely adopted or recognized in the field of mechanical engineering.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Provided but not sufficiently detailed to support the claim of national importance.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
Included letters from colleagues and professionals, which praised his work but did not adequately demonstrate his significant impact in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating that he is well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor or that waiving the labor certification requirement would be beneficial to the United States. The evidence provided was insufficient to support his claims of substantial impact and national importance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
