EB-2 NIW Case Study: Professor of International Studies (Case Denied)

An Assistant Professor sought EB2 NIW; she fell into a couple traps that might have been avoided with proper planning, including the peril of localized benefit.

This is my fourth case study on EB-2 NIW. Elsewhere within my Substack newsletter you can read the other 3 case studies. I will continue to post case studies to help people understand how USCIS is considering EB-2 NIW case filings pursuant to the standards of Matter of Dhanasar.

• Case Study #1 is a denial for a Lawyer.

• Case Study #2 is a denial for a Real Estate Developer.

• Case Study #3 is an approval of a Materials Engineer.

(The denials are based on cases shared on the USCIS website; the approval is my client).

In this fourth case study, I am actually summarizing the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on a denied motion to reconsider by the Assistant Professor.

Interestingly in this case, when reviewing the self-petitioner’s initial I-140 petition seeking EB-2 NIW designation, the USCIS Texas Service Center indicated that she DID have a viable proposed endeavor (satisfying Dhanasar prong 1), but the Texas Service Center denied her case by arguing she did not meet Dhanasar prong 2 (that is, she was not being well-positioned).

After getting the Texas Service Center denial, she appealed to the AAO, and the AAO in its initial review said that USCIS was wrong and she did NOT have a viable proposed endeavor. So, per the AAO, she was out at Prong 1!

Yikes — that didn’t go as expected!

After getting the initial AAO denial, she filed a motion to reconsider and that was also denied. What I am analyzing in this case study is the second AAO denial which was decided on June 13, 2022.

Let’s go through some of the details, particularly -

1. THE TRAP OF LOCALIZED BENEFIT.

2. THE TRAP OF A DISPARATE, UNFOCUSED PROPOSED ENDEAVOR.

3. THE TRUE VALUE OF UNPUBLISHED DECISIONS.

4. SUPPORTING A CASE WITH DETAILED, CORROBORATING EVIDENCE.