Date of Decision: May 31, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Thermal Science and Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Thermal R&D Engineer
Field: Thermal Science and Engineering
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree Professional: The petitioner was recognized as holding an advanced degree in mechanical engineering, qualifying him under the EB-2 visa classification.
Criteria Not Met:
National Importance: The petitioner did not successfully demonstrate that his proposed endeavors in thermal science had national importance, failing to show how his work would impact the broader industry or contribute significantly to the national goals.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner aimed to advance high-power electronics cooling technology, data center thermal management, and phase change heat transfer, which are pivotal for enhancing energy efficiency and reducing environmental impact in the U.S.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s work was acknowledged for its substantial merit in improving cooling efficiencies and energy consumption, he failed to demonstrate its national importance sufficiently. The USCIS required evidence that his work would have broad applications beyond his current employer and make a significant national impact, which was not provided.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various letters of recommendation, conference materials, peer-reviewed articles, and journal publications demonstrating his expertise and professional experience.
Additional documentation included testimonial letters, industry reports, citation statistics, and executive orders related to clean energy.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s described research activities and projected impact lacked specific details on new research projects and how these would be implemented to benefit the broader U.S. industry.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not specified, suggesting a lack of confirmed employment engagements that would align with the national interest waiver requirements.
Business Plan:
A detailed plan for implementing his research was not provided, which is critical in establishing how the petitioner’s work would translate into significant national benefits.
Advisory Letter:
Although supportive, the advisory letters mainly reiterated the petitioner’s past contributions without solid evidence of prospective national impact or specific ongoing projects.
Conclusion
The final determination to dismiss the appeal was based on the insufficient demonstration of how the petitioner’s future activities would align with and impact national interests significantly. The lack of detailed plans and concrete evidence of the broader application of his research contributed to the dismissal of his national interest waiver application.