EB-2 NIW Appeals: Information Technology
Last updated 2026-09-02
The AAO dismissed 92.9% of EB-2 NIW appeals from Information Technology petitioners in published non-precedent decisions from 2019–2025 (n=169). The criterion most often at issue was Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance.
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 5 (—) | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| 2024 | 94 (95.9%) | 0 | 4 | 98 |
| 2023 | 38 (88.4%) | 0 | 5 | 43 |
| 2022 | 10 (—) | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| 2021 | 8 (—) | 0 | 1 | 9 |
| 2020 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2019 | 1 (—) | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Criteria Breakdown
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total | Dismissal Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | 182 | 0 | 193 | 94.3% |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | 110 | 0 | 120 | 91.7% |
| Prong 3: On balance, waiver benefits the U.S. | 102 | 0 | 111 | 91.9% |
| Exceptional ability | 65 | 0 | 71 | 91.5% |
| Advanced degree | 36 | 0 | 42 | 85.7% |
| Motion to reopen/reconsider | 11 | 0 | 11 | — |
Example Decisions
Dismissed2025-03-11The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor had national importance
Dismissed2025-03-07The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that their proposed endeavor has 'national importanc
Dismissed2025-01-31The motion to reopen was dismissed because the petitioner did not provide new facts to establish that the AAO erred in i
Dismissed2024-09-27The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his proposed endeavor has national importance
Dismissed2024-09-26The motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner did not provide new facts or demonstrate a lega
NYSDOT-era decisions (pre-2017)
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2015 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2014 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2013 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 3 (—) | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2011 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2009 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2008 | 0 (—) | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2007 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2006 | 0 (—) | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 2005 | 6 (—) | 0 | 0 | 6 |
Criteria Discussed
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic merit (NYSDOT) | 14 | 3 | 17 |
| National in scope (NYSDOT) | 14 | 3 | 17 |
| Substantially greater degree than U.S. worker (NYSDOT) | 14 | 3 | 17 |
| Exceptional ability | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| Advanced degree | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Motion to reopen/reconsider | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Procedural/filing | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov. EB-2 NIW statistics reflect the Dhanasar framework era (2019–2025); the prior NYSDOT framework applied different legal standards. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →