EB-2 NIWChemistry and materialsIndividualDecided June 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN092021_08B5203
Merit and national importanceNot metWell positionedNot reached / not discussedBalance favors a waiverNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
A chemical engineer sought an NIW under EB-2. The AAO dismissed the appeal because she failed to establish national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. Her proposed endeavor—providing chemical engineering services across multiple industries—lacked specificity and demonstrated no substantial positive economic effects or potential to employ U.S. workers beyond individual employers.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Merit and national importance · Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance of specific proposed endeavor; vague reference to general chemical engineering fields insufficient.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Merit and national importance | Not met | Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance of specific proposed endeavor; vague reference to general chemical engineering fields insufficient. |
 Well positioned | Not reached / not discussed | Not analyzed because first prong failed; no need to reach second prong. |
 Balance favors a waiver | Not reached / not discussed | Not analyzed because second prong not reached; third prong analysis served no purpose. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.