dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Data Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MARCH 7, 2025 In Re: 37289559 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a data scientist, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as an advanced degree professional, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement attached to this classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1l 53(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b)(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides 
the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts of 
Appeals in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree 
professional because he submitted evidence of his Master of Science degree in computer science from 
the ________ We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether the Petitioner qualifies 
for a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest. 
The Petitioner initially described his proposed endeavor as "leveraging human mobility data to 
develop fair and interpretable mobility-based models and tools in order to enhance decision-making 
and create a sustainable and equitable urban environment that improves residents' wellbeing and 
quality of life." The Petitioner explained he would pursue his proposed endeavor while earning his 
doctoral degree in computer science from the land would then pursue a position 
as a postdoctoral research scholar at the 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner clarified that his proposed 
endeavor "aims to develop interpretable predictive models for urban applications like crime prediction, 
pandemic forecasting, and small business resilience, alongside designing auditing frameworks and 
algorithms to detect and mitigate bias." The Petitioner added that he would "create privacy-respectful 
experiential mobility data collection toolkits to inform equitable transit planning and improve public 
transportation accessibility." 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake. Id. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range 
of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Id. 
The Director determined the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. We agree. 
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other 
substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or has 
other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. The Director determined the 
Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would have real-world application outside of 
academic settings and would address national issues. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts the Director imposed erroneous standards inconsistent with 
Dhanasar. We agree. In Dhanasar we explained that "endeavors related to research, pure science, 
and the furtherance of human knowledge may qualify" and that national importance is not equivalent 
to "national in scope." Id. 
2 
The Petitioner further claims his proposed endeavor has national importance because Big Data is 
projected to contribute $1.3 trillion to directly benefit the United States and the Petitioner's work is 
"highly valuable for making the U.S. well-equipped to make better decisions for creating a sustainable 
and equitable urban environment for its residents." The Petitioner also submitted evidence that his 
proposed endeavor involves the critical emerging technology of artificial intelligence (AI) including 
the subfields of machine learning and deep learning, as identified in the National Science and 
Technology Council's Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update. The Petitioner further asserts 
the national importance of his proposed endeavor is evident in the funding his research has obtained 
from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. 
Specifically, the Petitioner claims that "by detecting and mitigating biases in predictive models used 
in law enforcement, healthcare, and urban development, [his] research can help reduce socioeconomic 
and racial inequalities that persist in these areas, ultimately promoting a more just and equitable 
society." The Petitioner also asserts that his research can inform policies and interventions that support 
the U.S. economy and help communities withstand and recover from natural disasters. The Petitioner 
further claims that through the development of privacy-respectful mobility data collection toolkits, his 
research can positively impact the lives of Americans who rely on public transit. The record does not 
document these implications of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner initially submitted two support letters. V-F-M-, Associate Professor of Information 
Studies at the _______ praises the Petitioner's experience and past research on human 
mobility and resilience modeling. V-F-M- does not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor in 
detail but states the Petitioner's "ongoing endeavors to guarantee the fairness and interpretability of 
urban prediction models are an asset to the United States and to the nation's urban planning 
initiatives." V-F-M- does not discuss any aspect of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor that supports 
the U.S. economy and helps communities withstand and recover from natural disasters. A-R-, 
Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the _______ praises the 
Petitioner's work on drug-disease-target identification for rare diseases and data-driven modeling of 
human mobility, but does not specifically discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or mention any 
work he has done on helping communities withstand and recover from natural disasters. 
In response to the RFE, the Petitioner submitted additional support letters. S-H-, Associate Professor 
of Civil, Environmental and Construction Engineering at the states the 
Petitioner's research "has demonstrated significant potential in understanding and enhancing the 
accuracy and fairness of various urban prediction models, such as those for crime and pandemic 
forecasting" and has "advanced the field of data science." S-H- does not discuss any potential 
prospective impact of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. R-X-, Professor of Biomedical 
Informatics at ___________ discusses how he relied on the Petitioner's research 
in two of his publications and praises the Petitioner as "a remarkable scholar whose influence is 
widespread throughout the field of data science." R-X- also does not discuss any potential prospective 
impact of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. J-B- Principal Scientist at ______ 
USA states she cited the Petitioner's work in an article published in Nature Methods and expresses 
her hope that he will "continue to enrich the field of data science," but does not specifically address 
any potential prospective impact of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
3 
The Petitioner initially submitted evidence he has co-authored eight articles published in journals and 
conference proceedings in his field which had been cited 34 times. The Petitioner did not specify how 
many of the citations were by independent researchers and did not articulate how his past publications 
address the specific research topics of his proposed endeavor. While the Petitioner submitted evidence 
that some of his research is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), he is not identified as 
the principal investigator on the NSF grant. 
The Petitioner submitted articles on how Big Data impacts smart cities, the economy, sustainable 
development, and involves socially responsible data, as well as reports and articles on data scientists, 
data analysts, the importance of improving public transportation, and inequities in the Paycheck 
Protection Program. These articles attest to the importance of Big Data, data science and analytics, 
improving public transportation and inequities in the Paycheck Protection Program, but they do not 
discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. Our assessment of national importance does not focus on 
the importance of a field or occupation in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. 
In sum, the record shows the Petitioner has published his research which has been cited by other 
researchers in his field, and he is well-respected in his field. The evidence does not establish however, 
the potential prospective impact of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor indicative of national 
importance. Consequently, the Petitioner does not meet the first Dhanasar prong. 
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor and he 
does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. As this issue is dispositive of the 
Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve determination of his eligibility under the 
second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) 
( stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is 
unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 
2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, he has not demonstrated that he 
is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of 
discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4