The Petitioner proposed to research and develop autonomous aerial robots (drones), improving their design, control, and path planning to create smarter, more capable robots.

Prong 1 — national importanceestablished

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“the fact that the Petitioner does not currently have such a position weighs against demonstrating either a specific model or plan for future activities or progress toward achieving the endeavor.”

“the Petitioner did not provide evidence of support from the university for this position, nor evidence of funding for or availability of such a position.”

“Without proposed employment in the United States, a statement of interest or support from a university or research institution, evidence of potential funding for such a position, or other such evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he currently has the ability to pursue his proposed endeavor.”

“the record does not establish what these cooperative agreements are and, for example, whether they are simply pre-existing agreements”

“The evidence in the record regarding the Petitioner's funding from U.S. government agencies does not appear to be like in kind to the funding received by the petitioner in Dhanasar.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• citations publications · credited
• resume experience · credited
• business plan · discounted

  “the Petitioner's own stated intention for advancing his endeavor requires an offer of employment, and he has not provided documentary evidence of pursuing this employment”

  AAO decision text
• funding · discounted

  “the record does not establish what these cooperative agreements are”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · ignored

Where this case turned

• Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
• Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
• No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing

Notable

AAO agreed with petitioner that his citation record and peer review activity were significant positive factors (crediting evidence the Director had discounted), but still found prong 2 failed overall due to lack of concrete employment/funding progress, distinguishing the case from Matter of Dhanasar itself on the facts.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

• 8 C.F.R. 103.3
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of L-A-C-

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