Date of Decision: August 30, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Research/Science/Education
Petitioner Information
Profession: Researcher
Field: Research/Science/Education
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 in scientific research and education had potential merit and importance. However, the specifics of how it would impact national interest were not clearly detailed.
Criteria Not Met:
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating his ability to advance his proposed scientific and educational endeavors significantly. The documents submitted, including letters of support, did not convincingly showcase his capacity to influence the field.
- Beneficial to the United States to Waive the Requirements of the Labor Certification Process: The petitioner did not adequately demonstrate that waiving the labor certification requirement would benefit the United States. The provided evidence did not sufficiently support his claims of national interest contributions.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue his scientific research and educational activities in the United States, including an innovative project called “Multitender.”
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was recognized for its potential merit in scientific research and education. However, the lack of detailed information and a clear implementation plan weakened the case for national importance.
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 significantly to scientific research and education in the U.S. However, the evidence provided was insufficient to justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted his curriculum vitae, personal statements, and letters of support. These documents did not adequately demonstrate his ability to significantly impact his field. The letters praised his work but lacked 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 his field.
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.
