dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Aviation

 
 
U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
In Re: 28945526 
Appeal of 
Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a commercial captain, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and/or an individual of 
exceptional ability, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this 
classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the record did not establish 
the Petitioner's eligibility under the frrst and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. The matter is 
now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de nova. Matter of Christa's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual 
of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary 
waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the tenn "national interest," Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national 
interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 
may, as matter of discretion1 , grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
11. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined the Petitioner qualifies for the underlying EB-2 classification. Therefore, the 
remaining issue is whether the Petitioner has established eligibility for a national interest waiver under 
the Dhanasar framework. While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have 
reviewed and considered each one. 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
the individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 
such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. 
Initially, we note that much of the Petitioner's evidence, such as the recommendation letters, 
statements, and training documents and certificates, demonstrate the Petitioner's education, 
experience, abilities, and skill. The Petitioner's personal and professional qualifications relate to the 
second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the 
foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes 
to undertake has substantial merit and national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. 
The Petitioner proposes to continue his work as a commercial captain of Airbus A320 aircrafts while 
also mentoring and transferring knowledge to younger generations who are interested in or are already 
pursuing careers in the aviation industry. He explained that his proposed endeavor has national 
implications because "he can provide expert advice, transferring his skills through mentoring 
colleagues and would-be Captains." He noted that, "as a person of color, [he] also provides an added 
benefit." In other words, "his presence as an outstanding airman will be an additional motivation and 
inspiration for a new generation of diverse aviation professionals." The Petitioner identified a list of 
six benefits his endeavor will impart to the United States, which include: 
1. Covid alleviation - he is ready to fly- he can jump into the seat of American, Delta, and Spirit 
Airlines or any other corporate/military of general aviation company and be immediately of 
value; 
2. Shortage alleviation - persons trained on narrow body (Airbus A320, 319) are in need- he can 
add value immediately as an expert on Airbus Narrowbodies; 
3. Freight cargo - he can join a freight company such as FedEx or DHL and be ready to fly; 
4. Passenger pent up demand - he can be ready to fly; 
5. Mentor transfer knowledge - he has and continues to do this work; and 
6. Inspiration to diverse youth - he has and continues to do this work. 
Recommendation letters and the Petitioner's statements demonstrate that the Petitioner mentors junior 
colleagues and is a member of the~----------------~· While we 
acknowledge this evidence, the Petitioner did not identify how much time he would devote to mentoring 
2 
orl Iactivities, nor has he explained the significance ofLJ membership in his mentoring work. 
Even if he had provided this, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how his work in this area would have 
broader implications in the field. 
He asserted that his endeavor will benefit the U.S. economy and national interest through the 
successful transport of people and goods, the airline industry's economic importance, and the severe 
shortage of pilots in the United States. The Petitioner emphasized that pilots and the field of aviation 
are important to the economy and that his proposed endeavor will offer substantial positive economic 
impacts. In support of his arguments concerning pilot shortages and positive economic impacts, he 
offered numerous articles about the flight industry, its economic implications, as well as the challenges 
faced by airlines and pilots. 
We conclude that a national shortage of professionals in a particular field does not necessarily establish 
the national importance of the proposed endeavor, as it does not in itself establish the proposed 
endeavor's impact. While the articles and reports provide helpful background information and 
establish the substantial merit of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, none of the reference materials 
discuss the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. As the Director explained, in determining national 
importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the 
individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes 
to undertake." See id. at 889. We acknowledge the importance of the aviation field and also of 
addressing the nation's shortage of pilots; however, the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained how 
his work as a pilot would resolve the pilot shortage or produce an impact rising to the level of national 
importance. Specifically, the Petitioner has not sufficiently analyzed and substantiated how one pilot 
will improve a national shortage or trigger substantial positive economic impacts. 
The Petitioner emphasized that his proposed endeavor creates jobs, increases revenue, and bolsters 
supply chains. Here, the Petitioner attributes the impact that airports and the aviation industry have 
upon the economy to his individual proposed endeavor. However, the Petitioner has not demonstrated 
how these benefits are attributable to his specific endeavor. For example, he has not demonstrated 
that he has hiring or job creation authority, nor has he presented data to suggest that his individual 
work as a captain would boost national or even an individual airline's revenue, and he has not shown 
what cargo he transports or how his individual work would impact the nation's supply chain. Even if 
this information were provided, the Petitioner would still need to explain how the impact his endeavor 
creates is on ascale commensurate with national importance. Likewise, the Petitioner stated that he can 
offer superior safety, security, and customer service as a pilot. We similarly conclude that the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated how any increases in the aviation industry's safety, security, and customer service 
would be attributable to his proposed endeavor, nor has he demonstrated this attribution on an individual 
airline level. 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides additional evidence to support the proposed endeavor's impact, 
including the Petitioner's proposed endeavor goals and motivations, printouts of executive orders 
designed to advance racT equi y, and more details onl I. The Petitioner proposes to continue his 
work and membership in 1, an organization that seeks to: motivate youth; increase the number of 
underrepresented professionals in aerospace and related careers; advocate for the concerns of its 
members; and persist in discourse that includes or addresses the lack of underrepresented populations in 
executive leadership positions and governing boards. The examples of executive orders and federal 
3 
policies specifically designed to address persistent poverty, inequality, and the lack of opportunities in 
conjunction with the statistics onl Isize, reach, and geographical breadth establish the national 
importance ofl I Nonetheless, the Petitioner has not explained how his specific work within I I 
would rise to the level of national importance. He has not defined his membership role and the evidence 
does not suggest he was afounding member ofI l serves on their board, or otherwise influences the 
organization. Further, he does not identify how much time he will devote tol Iactivities. While the 
Petitioner's teaching, inspiring, knowledge transference, and mentoring may impact the individual 
students, pilots, employers, or airlines with which the Petitioner works, his individual and cumulative 
work in these areas do not appear to operate on a scale that rises to the level of national importance. 
Similarly, in Dhanasar, we detennined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level 
of having national importance because they would nr imprt his field more broadly. Id. at 893. 
Although the Petitioner's plan to continue his work with and in similar activities is commendable 
and valuable, we conclude that this is not necessarily sufficient to establish the national importance of the 
proposed endeavor. 
On appeal, the Petitioner clarifies how one person can produce a nationally important impact with broad 
implications in their field, citing Wickard, Secretary of Agriculture, et al. v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) 
in support. The Petitioner explains that Wickard demonstrates how one wheat farmer could affect national 
wheat prices, thereby creating acumulative impact that negatively affected the entire agricultural industry 
and the goals of the Department of Agriculture. The Petitioner analogizes this situation to that of a 
pilot, contending that his endeavor is important because if he incorrectly performs the role, such as by 
not following Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules and regulations, then the whole industry 
and nation can be harmed. We do not disagree that one person's singular or cumulative activities can 
have broad implications across a whole industry such that they rise to the level of national importance. 
However, the Petitioner attempts to demonstrate a positive impact rising to the level of national 
importance by presenting the important downsides of not performing the job correctly. We conclude 
that preventing anegative effect is not necessarily sufficient to establish an affirmative positive impact 
that rises to the level of national importance. 
The Petitioner supplies us with additional evidence that includes an advisory opinion from I...._ ___,
I !Director of Aviation Programs at._____ ~____ __. documents establishing the 
Petitioner's ongoing training, as well as salary information. We received this evidence after the 
deadline for filing this appeal. Although we need not consider this evidence, we nevertheless 
examined the submission and conclude that it does not overcome the Director's findings or our above 
analysis. 
111. CONCLUSION 
The documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor 
as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision. Therefore, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for anational interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the third 
prong outlined in Dhanasar would serve no meaningful purpose. 
Because the identified reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to 
reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework. 
See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to 
4 
make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also 
Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on 
appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver. 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reason. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5