Yes. Startup founders can qualify for an EB-2 National Interest Waiver, but owning or launching a U.S. company is not enough. A petitioner must first qualify for the underlying EB-2 immigrant classification and then satisfy the three-part National Interest Waiver framework established in Matter of Dhanasar.
For entrepreneurs, USCIS does not simply ask whether startups, innovation, or job creation are good for the U.S. economy. The agency evaluates the petitioner’s qualifications, the specific work they propose to pursue, the prospective importance of that work, and the evidence showing that they are well positioned to advance it.
EB-2 Eligibility Comes Before the National Interest Waiver
An NIW is not a separate immigrant category. Before USCIS reaches the national-interest analysis, the petitioner must establish eligibility for EB-2 either as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as a person of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business.
For the advanced-degree route, having a master’s degree does not automatically resolve the issue. USCIS considers whether the occupation through which the proposed endeavor will be advanced qualifies as a profession and whether the petitioner’s education and, when applicable, progressive post-baccalaureate experience meet the underlying EB-2 requirements.
This can be particularly important for entrepreneurs whose role is described simply as founder, CEO, or business owner. A petition should connect the person’s academic and professional qualifications to the work they actually intend to perform through the proposed endeavor rather than relying on company ownership alone.
The exceptional-ability route works differently. A petitioner generally must first satisfy at least three regulatory evidentiary criteria. USCIS then evaluates the record as a whole to determine whether the person has a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the relevant field.
Meeting three initial criteria does not automatically establish exceptional ability. For an NIW petition based on exceptional ability, the claimed area of exceptional ability must also be directly related to the proposed endeavor.
The Three Questions USCIS Asks in an NIW Case
Once underlying EB-2 eligibility is established, USCIS applies the framework from Matter of Dhanasar. The petitioner must demonstrate that:
- the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance;
- the individual is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and
- on balance, it would benefit the United States to waive the normal job-offer and labor-certification requirements.
For a startup founder, these are three separate evidentiary questions.
The petition must explain what the entrepreneur intends to accomplish, why that work could have broader importance, and why this particular person has the experience, progress, resources, or support needed to advance it.
A Promising Startup Is Not Automatically Nationally Important
One of the most common weaknesses in entrepreneur NIW cases is relying on the importance of an industry instead of documenting the prospective impact of the specific endeavor.
Artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, biotechnology, healthcare, advanced manufacturing, clean energy, financial technology, and logistics may all involve work of substantial merit. But operating in an important sector does not automatically establish national importance.
USCIS focuses on the proposed endeavor itself and its potential prospective impact.
A founder developing cybersecurity software, for example, cannot rely only on the fact that cybersecurity is strategically important. The petition should show what problem the technology addresses, who is affected, how the solution differs from existing alternatives, how broadly it can be deployed, and what evidence supports the claimed impact.
Consider two entrepreneurs developing software for logistics companies.
The first explains that logistics is essential to the U.S. economy and projects substantial future revenue.
The second identifies a specific operational problem affecting a broader segment of the industry, documents pilot programs or customer adoption, explains how the technology addresses that problem, and provides evidence that the solution could improve efficiency or resilience across multiple organizations.
The second record gives USCIS a much stronger basis for evaluating prospective impact.
Define the Proposed Endeavor, Not Just the Company
A company and a proposed endeavor are not the same thing.
The company is the commercial vehicle through which an entrepreneur may pursue the work. The proposed endeavor describes what the petitioner actually intends to accomplish in the United States.
“Build and grow a cybersecurity startup” says relatively little about national importance.
A stronger description identifies the cybersecurity problem being addressed, the technology or methodology being developed, the intended users, the planned implementation, the expected scale, and the broader consequences if the project succeeds.
That distinction also determines what evidence matters.
If the claimed importance rests on reducing vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure, the petition should include evidence relevant to that problem. If the argument depends on economic impact, the record should explain the expected scale and basis of that impact. If the endeavor involves new technology, evidence of technical validation, intellectual property, adoption, research, or industry interest may become particularly relevant.
Objective Evidence Makes Business Projections More Credible
Business plans can be useful, but projections are stronger when supported by objective evidence.
For entrepreneurial NIW petitions, USCIS may consider evidence showing progress toward the proposed endeavor, including investment, revenue generation, customer or user interest, business development, market information, and other concrete steps already taken.
A projection of rapid expansion is more credible when a company already has signed customers, paid pilots, recurring revenue, strategic partnerships, investment commitments, regulatory progress, distribution agreements, or measurable product adoption.
Similarly, a claim that a technology could influence an industry becomes easier to evaluate when independent organizations have tested it, purchased it, licensed it, invested in it, or expressed documented interest.
An entrepreneur does not necessarily need to operate a mature company before filing. Early-stage ventures can still present persuasive evidence. The record should, however, provide a factual basis for the claimed future impact.
The Entrepreneur’s Track Record Should Support the Endeavor
The second Dhanasar prong asks whether the individual is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.
Relevant evidence may include prior companies, product launches, revenue growth, research, patents, investment raised, major clients, leadership responsibilities, awards, technical achievements, industry recognition, partnerships, or previous work addressing the same problem.
The strongest records usually show a clear connection between previous achievements and the proposed work.
An entrepreneur who has spent years developing fraud-detection systems and now plans to commercialize a new payment-security platform can demonstrate that connection directly. A petitioner entering a field unrelated to their previous experience may need substantially more evidence explaining why their background positions them to execute the new endeavor.
USCIS does not require proof that the endeavor is certain to succeed. The relevant question is whether the evidence shows that the petitioner is well positioned to advance it.
Funding Helps, but Funding Is Not the Legal Test
Investment can strengthen an entrepreneur’s petition because it may demonstrate outside interest, available resources, or progress toward commercialization.
It does not independently establish NIW eligibility.
A venture-backed consumer company is not automatically nationally important because investors value it highly. Conversely, an early-stage venture with modest funding may still present a persuasive case when the record documents meaningful prospective impact and the founder’s ability to advance the work.
Founders evaluating EB-2 NIW for entrepreneurs should therefore examine the relationship between their underlying EB-2 qualifications, proposed endeavor, supporting evidence, previous record, and expected U.S. impact rather than treating investment as a substitute for the Dhanasar analysis.
Job Creation Can Support a Case, but Scale and Evidence Matter
Employment creation can be relevant to national importance, particularly when an endeavor has the potential to produce substantial positive economic effects.
But a business plan stating that a company intends to hire U.S. workers does not automatically establish national importance.
The strength of an economic-impact argument depends on the scale of the claimed effect and the evidence supporting it. Hiring plans should be consistent with the company’s funding, revenue, market demand, operating model, and realistic growth assumptions.
A founder relying heavily on job creation should be prepared to explain how employment projections were calculated and why they are credible rather than presenting hiring numbers as isolated forecasts.
Independent Validation Can Strengthen the Record
Third-party evidence can be especially useful in entrepreneur cases because it reduces reliance on the founder’s own predictions.
Depending on the venture, relevant evidence may come from customers, investors, universities, government agencies, accelerators, industry organizations, technical experts, research partners, or established companies.
Expert letters are most useful when they explain specific facts: how the writer knows the petitioner’s work, what results have already been observed, why the problem matters, and what broader impact may reasonably follow.
Generic praise carries less evidentiary value than concrete, verifiable information.
Customer contracts, investment records, technical validation, government interest, patents, market adoption, and expert evidence are most useful when they independently support the same claimed characteristics of the proposed endeavor.
How the Evidence Should Fit Together
An effective entrepreneur NIW petition requires more than a strong résumé or an attractive business plan.
The underlying EB-2 evidence should establish that the petitioner qualifies for the immigrant classification itself. The proposed endeavor should be defined precisely enough for USCIS to evaluate its potential prospective impact. Evidence of prior achievements should explain why the individual is positioned to pursue the work. Commercial and third-party evidence should support the claimed scale, feasibility, and significance of the endeavor.
EB-2 NIW can be particularly relevant to entrepreneurs because a qualifying petitioner may self-petition and seek a waiver of the usual job-offer and labor-certification requirements.
For startup founders, the central question is not whether entrepreneurship benefits the United States in general. It is whether the particular petitioner, pursuing a clearly defined endeavor, can establish the required EB-2 qualifications and provide credible evidence satisfying each part of the national-interest framework.
