Engineering: automotive manufacturing simulation
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not establish the national importance of the beneficiary's proposed endeavor, so it reserved the second and third Dhanasar 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
An employer petitioned for a manufacturing engineer to receive EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver. SCOPS accepted the advanced-degree qualification, and the AAO agreed that the endeavor, which involves simulation and workflow optimization in automotive plants, has substantial merit. It nonetheless found that the record did not show national importance, because the supporting letters and articles spoke to the importance of the industry rather than the effect of her specific work beyond her employer. The AAO dismissed the appeal and left the other two prongs undecided.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | Not met | Here, we conclude the record does not show that the Beneficiary's specific proposed endeavor stands |
| 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
- SCOPS found the beneficiary qualified as an advanced degree professional and that the endeavor had substantial merit and she was well-positioned; the AAO agreed on substantial merit but found national importance not established.
- Letters from a supervisor and an executive, and the articles about the automotive industry and clean energy, described the importance of the industry or profession in general rather than the specific endeavor.
- The petitioner did not show that the beneficiary's specific projects would extend beyond her employer's operations to impact the field, industry or economy more broadly.
- Claims about the employer's overall vehicle sales were not tied to the beneficiary's particular role, and there was no information on projected U.S. job creation or economic impact attributable to her work.
- Because the first prong was not met, the AAO reserved the second and third prongs.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015)
- Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016)
- Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023)
- INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976)
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