Date of Decision: June 14, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Pharmaceutical Science
Petitioner Information
Profession: Pharmaceutical Scientist
Field: Pharmaceutics, Drug Development, Computational Tools
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 proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance. His research in pharmaceutics, drug development, and computational tools was recognized for its potential to impact the pharmaceutical field significantly.
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, published articles, and letters of support, these did not convincingly demonstrate his capacity to significantly influence or advance the fields of pharmaceutics and drug development.
- 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 continue his research in pharmaceutics, drug development, and computational tools. His goal was to advance the understanding of drug properties and develop new dosage formulations.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit and national importance due to its potential to address critical issues in drug development and pharmaceutical science. His research has broader implications for the field, as it is disseminated through scientific journals and conferences.
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 pharmaceutics and drug development. 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, published articles, and letters of support. 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 pharmaceutics and drug development.
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
