The petitioner, a civil engineer pursuing a doctorate in geography and spatial sciences, proposed developing a data-driven framework and early-warning/prediction systems to monitor water quality and control waterborne diseases such as NTM infection and Legionnaires' disease.

Prong 2 — well positionedestablished

Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established · dispositive

“The inclusion alone does not establish that the national interest in the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is so urgent it warrants foregoing the labor certification process.”

“the fact that the Petitioner has met the second Dhanasar prong does not establish his eligibility under the third Dhanasar prong.”

“The Petitioner does not sufficiently articulate how the United States would benefit from the Petitioner's contributions if other qualified U.S. workers are available.”

“All of these factors are present in the Petitioner's case.”

“However, the Petitioner has not established his eligibility under the factors identified in Dhanasar.”

“These articles are relevant to the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, but do not establish that the national interest in his research is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · credited
• citations publications · credited
• funding · credited
• degree · credited

Where this case turned

• Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
• Strong positive factor rejected · p3 — the STEM critical-and-emerging-technology factor was claimed but not accepted on the record
• Urgency not established · p3 — no reason shown why the benefit cannot wait for labour certification
• U.S. worker availability · p3 — the impracticality of a labour-market test was asserted, not established

Notable

Unusual outcome pattern: the AAO reversed the Director and found the petitioner satisfied prong two (well positioned), but still dismissed the appeal solely on prong three, rejecting the STEM/critical-emerging-technology strong-positive-factor argument as insufficient standing alone and finding a temporary doctoral position did not render a job offer or labor certification impractical.

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
• INA 203(b)(2)
• USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)

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