The petitioner, a software engineer with a Ph.D. in molecular engineering and data science, proposed to continue research on molecular design for high-efficiency, low-cost water treatment membranes and clean energy storage technologies.

Prong 1 — national importanceestablished

“We withdraw SCOPS' determination that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor under Dhanasar 's first prong.”

“As the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed research, he has established that he meets the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“However, a degree, in and of itself: is not a basis to determine that a person is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”

“the Petitioner did not sufficiently explain the number of self-citations or those made by co-authors, which limits the ability to assess the objectivity and the breadth of the impact.”

“this evidence alone is insufficient to demonstrate a level of interest or a record ofresearch success that renders him well positioned.”

“the Petitioner has not provided evidence of progress toward achieving the specific goals of his proposed endeavor, nor has he shown that there is established interest in his future research.”

“the Petitioner has not shown that he was the primary award recipient or principal investigator.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “this evidence alone is insufficient to demonstrate a level of interest or a record of research success that renders him well positioned”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “citation frequency, which may include self-citations, is quantitative in nature and does not reveal the reasons for the citations”

  AAO decision text
• funding · discounted

  “the Petitioner has not shown that he was the primary award recipient or principal investigator”

  AAO decision text
• degree · discounted

  “a degree, in and of itself, is not a basis to determine that a person is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained how he has been actively conducting research and advancing his proposed endeavor as a software engineer”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
• Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
• Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
• 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

AAO withdrew SCOPS' prong-1 denial (finding national importance established) but dismissed on prong 2, then reserved prong 3, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to reach unnecessary issues.

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.

• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of L-A-C-
• 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