dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Aviation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 23, 2024 In Re: 33947010 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an airline pilot and CEO, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
immigrant classification as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree 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. § ll 53(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 visa classification. The Director further concluded the 
record did not support a finding that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor 
certification, would be in the national interest. The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 
8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. A U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five 
years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Profession is defined as one of the occupations listed in section 10l(a)(32) of the Act, as well as any 
occupation for which a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement 
for entry into the occupation. 1 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Exceptional ability means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the 
sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation 
that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 2 Meeting 
at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. 3 If 
a petitioner does so, we will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence 
in its totality shows that they are recognized as having the requisite degree of expertise and will 
substantially benefit the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United 
States. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Our precedent decision in Matter ofDhanasar, 26 T&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 
discretion, 4 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner intends to come to the United States and open a branch of a pilot training company, 
which he founded in Slovakia in 2000. The Petitioner asserts that he is eligible for the EB-2 
classification as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of 
exceptional ability. Specifically, he states he is a "pilot with the addition of extraordinary ability in 
the ability to manage airports as CEO and tum indebted airports into profitable ones" and "is CEO of 
[a] private pilot training company which he owns." His proposed endeavor is "to teach and train pilots 
which will contribute to the employment of U.S. workers and broadly enhance societal welfare" in the 
United States. He claims that the expansion of his existing pilot training company in the United States 
"will generate new resources needed for its operation and development". The Petitioner contends his 
professional background gives him the necessary experience to succeed in this endeavor. 
1 Profession shall include but not be limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in 
elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries. Section 101 (a)(32) of the Act. 
2 If these types of evidence do not readily apply to the individual's occupation, a petitioner may submit comparable 
evidence to establish their eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii). 
3 USCIS has previously confirmed the applicability of this two-part adjudicative approach in the context of individuals of 
exceptional ability. 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f-chapter-5. 
4 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts in concluding 
that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
2 
To qualify for a national interest waiver, the Petitioner must first show that he qualifies for the EB-2 
classification under section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act, either as an advanced degree professional or an 
individual of exceptional ability. The Director denied the petition, in part, determining that the 
Petitioner did not meet the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or an individual of 
exceptional ability. The Director further determined that although the Petitioner established the 
substantial merit of his proposed endeavor, he did not establish its national importance, that he is well­
positioned to advance that proposed endeavor, or that it would be beneficial to the United States to 
waive the requirements of a job offer. We agree that the Petitioner has not established that his 
proposed endeavor has national importance and will dismiss the appeal accordingly. 5 
The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor met the national 
importance element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Specifically, the Director 
determined the Petitioner did not establish his proposed endeavor would have broader implications to 
the field of aviation or have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise have substantial 
positive economic effects such that he established its national importance. The first prong of 
Dhanasar, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that 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 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The record does not establish the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will have substantial positive impacts 
on the U.S. economy. Although any basic economic activity has the potential to positively impact a 
local economy, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how the economic activity directly resulting from 
his proposed endeavor would rise to the level of national importance. An endeavor may have national 
importance if it "has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area .... " Id. at 890. The Petitioner seeks 
to come to the United States to extend his existing venture - a pilot training company. He asserts that 
his proposed endeavor of working as a pilot instructor and CEO will generate jobs for U.S. workers 
and positively contribute to the U.S. economy. In his business plan, the Petitioner indicated the U.S. 
based branch of his company would generate a cumulative 14 jobs and $17 million dollars in revenue 
by its fifth year of business. However, the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for 
the basis of these projections. Further, even if sufficient basis were provided for the proposed 
endeavor's revenue and job creation projections, these figures do not establish that the Petitioner's 
company would operate on a scale rising to the level of national importance. The Petitioner has not 
explained how his proposed employment metrics and revenue would have impact beyond his 
business's area of intended operations. Upon de novo review, the Petitioner did not establish his 
proposed endeavor would have substantial positive economic effects. 
Further, the evidence submitted by the Petitioner does not establish his proposed endeavor would 
operate on such a large scale as to have a national impact on the aviation industry. When determining 
5 As the Petitioner has not overcome the Director's determination that the record did not establish a waiver of the required 
job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest, we need not address whether he is eligible 
for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability. 
3 
the national importance of a proposed endeavor, the relevant question is not the importance of the 
industry, sector, or profession in which the individual will work; rather, we focus on "the specific 
endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In 
Dhanasar, we further noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that 
"[a ]n undertaking may have national importance, for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field." Id. Although the Petitioner has provided evidence of his 
professional experience, including his resume, an article about his professional success, and letters of 
reference, the inquiry in the first prong of the Dhanasar framework focuses on "the specific endeavor 
that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See id. The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and prior 
work in his field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from 
the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." See id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific 
endeavor that he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar' s first prong. The 
Petitioner does not offer evidence to show how his proposed endeavor would impact the aviation 
industry or otherwise would operate on such a scale as to rise to a level of national importance. 
Although the Petitioner's specific venture has the potential to provide valuable services to his clients, 
he did not establish his specific proposed endeavor will have substantial national implications or have 
a broader impact beyond the individuals directly served by his company. The Petitioner also has not 
established that his proposed endeavor stands to significantly reduce a national labor shortage of 
airline pilots as claimed. Moreover, shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. 
Department of Labor through the labor certification process. While we acknowledge the importance 
of the field of aviation, the Petitioner did not establish his proposed endeavor would have broader 
implications to the overall field to establish its national importance. See id. at 893. 
Thus, because the identified basis for denial is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to 
reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's additional appellate arguments regarding his eligibility for a 
discretionary waiver under the Dhanasar analytical framework and his eligibility for EB-2 
classification. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required 
to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also 
Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on 
appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
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 as 
a matter of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4