The Petitioner, a researcher and developer of artificial intelligence (Al) for information retrieval, graph mining, and natural language processing systems, seeks classification under the employment-based, second-preference (EB-2) immigrant visa category and a waiver of the category's job-offer requirement. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has discretion to excuse job offers in this category - and thus related requirements for certifications from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) - if petitioners demonstrate that waivers of these U.S.-worker protections would be "in the national interest." Id.
After first granting the filing, Service Center Operations (SCOPS) revoked the petition's approval. SCOPS found that the Petitioner qualified for the EB-2 category as a member of the professions holding an "advanced degree" and demonstrated that his proposed U.S. work has "substantial merit" and that he is "well positioned" to advance it. But SCOPS concluded that it erroneously approved the petition, finding insufficient evidence that his proposed endeavor has "national importance" or that, on balance, a waiver of the U.S.-worker protections in his case would benefit the country. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that SCOPS overlooked evidence and imposed improper evidentiary requirements.
In revocation proceedings, the Petitioner continues to bear the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter ofHo, 19 l&N Dec. 582,589 (BIA 1988) ( citation omitted). Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter ofChristo 's, Inc. , 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015), we conclude that he established his endeavor's national importance and a waiver's ultimate benefit to the United States. We will therefore sustain the appeal.
Law
To establish eligibility for national interest waivers, petitioners must first demonstrate their qualifications for the EB-2 category, either as advanced degree professionals or aliens of "exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. To protect jobs for U.S. workers, this immigrant visa category usually requires prospective U.S. employers to offer aliens work and to obtain DOL certifications to permanently employ them in the country. See section 212(a)(5)(D) p. 2 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(D). Petitioners may avoid the job offer/labor certification requirements by demonstrating that waivers of the U.S.-worker protections would be "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act.
Neither the Act nor regulations define the term "national interest." So, to adjudicate these waiver requests, we have established a framework. If otherwise qualified as advanced degree professionals or aliens of exceptional ability, petitioners may warrant waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements by demonstrating that:
- Their proposed U.S. work has "substantial merit" and "national importance;"
- They are "well positioned" to advance their intended endeavors; and
- All things considered, waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements would benefit the United States.
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889-91 (AAO 2016); see generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(5)(D)( 1 ), www.uscis.gov/policy-manual.
"[A]t any time" before a petitioner obtains U.S. permanent residence, USCIS may revoke a petition's approval "for good and sufficient cause." Section 205 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1155; see also Joseph v. Landon, 679 F.2d 113, 115-16 (7th Cir. 1982). A petition's erroneous approval may justify its revocation. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. at 590.
USCIS properly issues a notice ofintent to revoke (NOIR) a petition ifthe unexplained and unrebutted evidence at the time of the NOIR's issue would have warranted the filing's denial. Matter ofEstime, 19 I&N Dec. 450, 451 (BIA 1987). The Agency properly revokes a petition's approval if a petitioner does not timely respond to a NOIR or their response does not overcome the stated revocation grounds. Id. at 450-51.
Analysis
A. The Proposed Endeavor
The record shows that the Petitioner received a bachelor of science degree in electrical engineering and statistics from a Chinese university and a master of science degree in computer science from a U.S. school. Between 2020 and 2024, conferences in the computer science field published several articles he wrote, including a number in which he served as the first author. At the time ofthe petition's filing in March 2024, his work had generated several hundred citations. He also "peer reviewed" other researchers' work at conferences before its publication and served as a researcher at U.S. universities and large e-commerce companies.
The Petitioner is now pursuing a doctoral degree in computer science while working as a researcher at the U.S. university where he studies. After earning a Ph.D., he plans to obtain a research associate job at the school or another U.S. employer. The Petitioner stated that "he will explore cutting-edge deep learning techniques for graph mining and natural language processing, devise innovative models to address complex tasks like real-world text retrieval, employ sophisticated [AI] approaches, and publish original computer science research in peer-reviewed conferences." He stated that his work: p. 3 enhances recommender and text retrieval systems, complex graph modeling, and text understanding resources, creating data analytics that work better than current industry standards. By implementing his expertise in these areas, his work stands to provide a positive financial impact to retail corporations, educational systems, healthcare platforms, government institutions, and all other businesses which rely on information processmg.
The record supports the Petitioner's qualifications for the requested immigrant visa category as an advanced degree professional. He also demonstrated that his proposed U.S. work has substantial merit and that he is well positioned to advance it. We must now review SCOPS' findings regarding the venture's national importance and a waiver's overall benefit to the United States.
B. National Importance
When determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, USCIS must focus on the particular venture, specifically on its "potential prospective impact." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. "An undertaking may have national importance, for example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id.
Ultimately, if the evidence ofrecord demonstrates that the person's proposed endeavor has the significant potential to broadly enhance societal welfare or cultural or artistic enrichment, or to contribute to the advancement of a valuable technology or field of study, it may rise to the level of national importance.
Thus, like the scientific researcher in Dhanasar, the Petitioner must submit evidence "describ[ing] the importance of [his] research as it relates to U.S. strategic interests." Id.
The record does not support SCOPS' finding ofno letters "from interested U.S. government agencies or ... federally funded research and development centers establishing that [the Petitioner J's specific proposed endeavor promises to advance a critical and emerging technology or is otherwise important for purposes of maintaining the United States' technological prominence." He submitted documentation showing that a U.S. government agency has designated AI - including his specialties of machine and deep learning - as "a critical and emerging technology." The agency found that this advanced technology is "potentially significant to U.S. national security," including the American people's security and "expand[ing] economic prosperity and opportunity." The agency's list ofcritical and emerging technologies is designed to "promote U.S. technological leadership; ... advance and maintain shared technological advantages; [and] develop, design, govern, and use [technologies] that yield tangible benefits for society and are aligned with democratic values."
Expert letters also link the Petitioner's research to U.S. strategic interests. A U.S. assistant professor of statistics and data science whose work has cited the Petitioner's stated that the Petitioner's research on information retrieval systems "advances product recommendations for e-commerce companies ... that rely on accurate recommendations to retain their userbases." Also, a director of a U.S. government-funded geospatial science and technology center described the Petitioner's development of "a deep learning-based framework that organizes unstructured geospatial text data into structured, actionable insights" and "a generative large language model capable of interacting with the [framework] via cutting-edge information retrieval mechanisms." The director stated: "This innovation promises to revolutionize geospatial AI research, providing a transformative tool that will benefit researchers worldwide .... His leading-edge contributions are not only advancing the state of the art in AI but are also addressing national and global challenges."
The Petitioner's doctoral advisor further cited "his groundbreaking work in integrating [large language models] with domain-specific retrieval mechanisms." The advisor stated:
These contributions not only fill a critical gap in current AI capabilities but also address the urgent and growing need for robust, scalable, and contextually grounded AI solutions across various sectors in the United States, including geospatial intelligence, healthcare, and public policy. The time-sensitive nature of [his] research cannot be overstated. The rapid advancements in AI demand immediate action to ensure the United States remains at the forefront of this transformational field. [His] work provides a rare and invaluable opportunity to develop cutting-edge technologies that will drive innovation, enhance economic competitiveness, and address pressing national challenges in data science and AI.
Like the researcher inDhanasar, the Petitioner also submitted evidence that a U.S. government agency funded some of his research. Thus, as in Dhanasar, "the significance of the petitioner's research in his field is corroborated by evidence of peer and government interest in his research." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893.
Further, contrary to SCOPS' finding, a preponderance of the evidence indicates that the Petitioner's proposed work has broad applications to U.S. companies, consumers, and researchers in many sectors, thus prospectively benefiting more than the university where he studies and works, his future employers, and their customers. As he argues: "[His] specific proposed endeavor, which focuses precisely on improving data retrieval and processing systems through state-of-the-art artificial intelligence techniques, contributes to solutions that address a specific technological need with broad implications."
The Petitioner has demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has national importance. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary finding.
C. Waiver Benefits to the United States
A successful petitioner for a national interest waiver must demonstrate that "on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements ofa job offer and thus ofa labor certification." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 890.
On the one hand, Congress clearly sought to further the national interest by requiring job offers and labor certifications to protect the domestic labor supply. On the other hand, by creating the national interest waiver, Congress recognized that in certain cases the benefits inherent in the labor certification process can be outweighed by other factors that are also deemed to be in the national interest.
Id.
When balancing these competing interests, USCIS may evaluate factors such as:
- whether, in light of the nature of the alien's qualifications or proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the alien to secure a job offer or for a petitioner to obtain a labor certification;
- whether, even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the alien's contributions; and
- whether the national interest in the alien's work is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process.
Id. at 890-91.
In Dhanasar, we concluded that, all things considered, waiving a job offer for the petitioning aerospace researcher would benefit the United States. Id. at 893. We noted that the researcher had three graduate degrees in relevant fields and "considerable experience and expertise in a highly specialized field." Id. Evidence also showed that research in his hypersonic propulsion field "holds significant implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness" and that "the repeated funding ofresearch in which the petitioner played a key role indicates that government agencies ... have found his work on this topic to be promising and useful." Id.
The Petitioner here has considerable experience and expertise in the AI field. Also, as in Dhanasar and previously discussed, his field has significant implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness. Further, as in Dhanasar, a U.S. government agency has funded some ofhis research, suggesting that his work has promise and national usefulness.
Reviewing the specific facts of this case collectively, the factors favor a waiver. Thus, the Petitioner has demonstrated that, on balance, a job offer waiver would benefit the United States. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary finding.
Conclusion
The Petitioner has established that his proposed endeavor has national importance and that, all things considered, a waiver would benefit the United States. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary findings and approve the petition, including favorably exercising discretion to grant the national interest waiver request.
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.