Data science applied to financial services (anti-financial-crime)
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not establish the national importance of the beneficiary's proposed endeavor, and it reserved the other prongs.
Summarized by AI. Summaries on this site are written by AI and can contain errors. Always read the full decision on uscis.gov before relying on anything here. If a summary differs from the official decision, the official decision controls.
Summary
A petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for a data science associate. The AAO agreed with the Texas Service Center Director that the endeavor had substantial merit but did not rise to national importance. It stressed that the question concerns the specific endeavor rather than the importance of financial-crime prevention or the size of the beneficiary's employer. Expert letters were found to make broad claims without specifics, and workforce-shortage arguments were not enough. The remaining prongs were reserved and the appeal was dismissed.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | Not met | As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | Not reached | |
| Prong 3: Balance favors waiving the job offer | Not reached |
Why the AAO decided this way
- The AAO agreed with the Director that the endeavor had substantial merit but did not rise to national importance, since the importance of a field or profession is not the test.
- The size and prominence of the employer did not show that the beneficiary's own tasks have national implications, and the claimed innovations were not detailed enough to show impact at the required level.
- Expert letters contained broad, general assertions about the financial and technological sectors without explaining how this specific endeavor would affect the field at a national level.
- A claimed shortage of STEM workers does not make an endeavor nationally important, and the record did not show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial economic effects.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 (AAO 2015)
- Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016)
- Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85 (5th Cir. 2023)
- Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm'r 1988)
- INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24 (1976)
- Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516 (BIA 2015)
Read the full decision on uscis.gov ↗
Please describe the error only. Do not send personal or case information. Anything you send will not be treated as confidential, and an error report does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Report an error in this summary