The petitioner proposes to develop and utilize advanced numerical tools to analyze the material properties of strongly correlated quantum materials, with the goal of advancing scientific understanding and developing next-generation superconductors and magnetic materials for applications in energy and information technologies. He plans to pursue this research through outside-employment collaboration while working full-time as an optical science engineer.

Prong 1 — national importanceestablished

“The evidence in the record is not sufficient to show that the benefits of the Petitioner's position at have the potential to result in broader implications beyond the benefits to his employer.”

“activities which only benefit the Petitioner's employer would not rise to the level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“the record nevertheless appears to show that the research was conducted as part of the Petitioner's Ph.D. program.”

“the evidence is not sufficiently probative of the Petitioner's future ability to continue to publish and present research outside of the academic environment.”

“this single research paper is not sufficient to demonstrate the credibility of the Petitioner's plan to advance the proposed endeavor during his evenings and weekends.”

“notably they do not discuss nor support the Petitioner's claims regarding these ongoing research projects that the Petitioner claims he is pursuing with them.”

“the letters do not describe how the Petitioner will carry out future research activities given that he is no longer a graduate student, a postdoctoral fellow, or in a full-time researcher position.”

“The record does not contain evidence of other ongoing financial or institutional support for the Petitioner to pursue his proposed research endeavor during 'evenings and weekends.'”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• degree · credited
• citations publications · discounted

  “beyond having been cited in published works, the articles do not describe how his future research endeavor has interest or support from others in his field.”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the letters do not describe how the Petitioner will carry out future research activities given that he is no longer a graduate student, a postdoctoral fellow, or in a full-time researcher position.”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the Petitioner did not submit evidence from such as a job description or support letter from the company, or other documentation to support these claims.”

  AAO decision text
• funding · discounted

  “The record also does not contain evidence that the Petitioner has received U.S. government funding, or that he initiated or was the primary award contact on any funding proposals.”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
• Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
• Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
• No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
• Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

Notable

The AAO partially reversed SCOPS on prong 1, finding the research-based aspects of the endeavor do have national importance, while agreeing that the employment-at-employer aspect does not. The decision is notable for its detailed analysis of the 'evenings and weekends' research plan, finding that a single post-PhD paper and collaborator letters that fail to mention the ongoing projects are insufficient to establish credibility of the plan. The AAO also drew an analogy to Dhanasar's own facts (repeated government funding, primary award contact) to highlight what was missing. The petitioner's Ph.D. was awarded in April 2024 and the petition appears to have been filed very shortly thereafter, which the AAO found probative of the lack of independent post-degree research progress.

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
• The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
• The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
• The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
• The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl