dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Aviation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 5, 2024 In Re: 34931040 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an airline pilot, seeks classification as an individual of exceptional ability in the 
sciences, arts or business. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b)(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is 
attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification . Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner's endeavor would have national importance, that he is well-positioned to 
advance that endeavor, or that, on balance, it would benefit the United States to waive the job offer 
requirement. 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 novo. Matter of Christa 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
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. 1 Because this classification requires that the 
individual ' s services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. Section 203(b)(2) of the Act. 
Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) states that after EB-2 eligibility has been 
established, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner 
demonstrates that: (1) the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national 
importance; (2) that the noncitizen is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, 
on balance, it would benefit the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a 
labor certification. 
1 The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability, 
which the record supports. 
The first prong of the Dhanasar test, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific 
endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889-90. 
When determining whether a proposed endeavor would have national importance, we examine the 
specific impact of that proposed endeavor. Id. For example, an endeavor may qualify if it has national 
implications within a particular field, or if it has significant potential to have a substantial economic 
effect, especially in an economically depressed area. Id. 
The proposed endeavor involves continuing his role as an airline pilot and training and mentoring new 
pilots. The Director concluded that while this endeavor has substantial merit, it does not have an 
impact rising to the level of national importance. On appeal, the Petitioner provides a brief contending 
that the Director did not properly examine the provided documentation using the preponderance of the 
evidence standard. 
When determining eligibility under the preponderance of the evidence standard, we examine each 
piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the 
context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true. 
Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. at 376 (citing Matter of E-M-, 20 l&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Cornm'r 1989)). While 
the Petitioner contends that the Director "did not give due regard" to his evidence or employ the correct 
standard of proof, he provides no examples of information or arguments that were omitted from the 
denial notice or identify how the Director's standard of proof differed from preponderance of the 
evidence. Upon review, the Petitioner has not met his burden of proof to overcome the Director 's 
denial and establish that his endeavor is more likely than not to be nationally important. Id.; Matter 
of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889-90. 
On appeal, as in his underlying petition, the Petitioner emphasizes the shortage of qualified pilots in 
the United States as evidence that he meets the national importance standard. However, when 
determining whether a proposed endeavor would have national importance, the relevant question is 
not the importance of the industry or occupation where the Petitioner will work, but the specific impact 
of that proposed endeavor. Id.; see generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(1), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual ("The term 'endeavor' is more specific than the general 
occupation; a petitioner should offer details not only as to what the occupation normally involves, but 
what types of work the person proposes to undertake specifically within that occupation."). The 
Petitioner has not specified how his employment as a pilot, in and of itself, would alleviate a 
nationwide shortage of such workers. Similarly, while the appellate briefreiterates the petition's claim 
that the Petitioner will train and mentor new pilots in the United States, the record provides no further 
details about this aspect of the endeavor. The record does not establish how the Petitioner's teaching 
would impact the U.S. pilot shortage on a level rising to national importance.2 
The Petitioner also claims that his endeavor will be nationally important due to the importance of the 
aviation industry to the United States. However, working in an area with substantial merit does not 
mean that one's endeavor will have national importance. In Dhanasar, the petitioner's work as a 
2 We further note that the Department of Labor directly addresses U.S. worker shortages through the labor certification 
process. Therefore, a shortage of qualified workers in an occupation is not sufficient, in and of itself, to establish that 
workers in that occupation should receive a waiver of the job offer requirement. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 
885; see also 20 C.F.R. § 656.1. 
2 
science teacher was found to have substantial merit but did not qualify him under the first prong 
because the evidence did not show how that work would impact the field of science education more 
broadly. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. Similarly, while the Petitioner's endeavor in the 
present case is in an area of substantial merit, he has not established that endeavor's national 
importance because he has not provided documentation of its prospective impact on the broader field 
of aviation beyond his prospective employers and customers. Id. 
While we acknowledge the provided documentation regarding the economic importance of the U.S. 
aviation industry, the Petitioner has not provided evidence establishing what economic effects would 
be attributable to his specific endeavor. Id. at 889-90. As noted by the Director, the record does not 
demonstrate how the Petitioner's work as a pilot, in and of itself, would have significant potential to 
employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial economic benefits to the U.S. or regional economy 
through business activity or trade. The Petitioner therefore has not established that his endeavor would 
result in "substantial positive economic effects" as contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
The Petitioner also indicated in the record that their proposed endeavor would lead to knowledge 
proliferation in the aviation industry. This aviation knowledge proliferation is akin to teaching 
activities. In Dhanasar, we considered a petitioner's teaching activities and concluded that they did 
not rise to the level of having national importance because they were not shown to impact a field of 
endeavor more broadly than the immediate effect or influence on the cohort receiving the teaching. 
See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 893. The record does not adequately support that the Petitioner's 
aviation knowledge proliferation through their teaching and mentoring will have an impact on the field 
of aviation in the United States. The record does not have a cognizable or detailed plan for reaching 
an audience wider than the individuals the Petitioner will purportedly directly train and mentor in the 
future. 
The manifest thrust of the Petitioner's claim of eligibility for the act of discretion to waive the 
requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, in the national interest comes from the 
Petitioner's claims regarding their profession's importance, their past career as a pilot in their home 
country, and their dedication to their field. But these attributes, critical as they may be for an endeavor's 
success, are not germane to the question of whether a proposed endeavor elevates to a position of 
national importance. We are not concerned with the individual petitioner when evaluating the first 
prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework; we are focused on the petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
The success of the endeavor, or attributes that could tend to make the endeavor more successful, are 
consequently not as important as determining whether the proposed endeavor itself stripped away from 
a petitioner, has attributes that would highlight the prospective positive impact of its broader 
implications or positive economic effects rising to a level of national importance. Moreover, the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that his techniques and practices are unique, innovative, or new to the 
aviation field. Accordingly, the evidence does not support a finding that even if the Petitioner reached 
the public at large, that his services would impact the aviation field or the nation as a whole. 
Finally, the Petitioner states that his years of experience, skills, and ability as a pilot will make his 
endeavor nationally important. However, these factors relate to the second Dhanasar prong regarding 
whether the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance his endeavor. They do not relate to that 
endeavor's prospective impact. The Petitioner has not provided documentation establishing what 
impact would be attributable to his endeavor or that this impact would rise to the level of national 
3 
importance. As such, he does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar test. Because this issue is 
dispositive of the appeal, we need not address the Petitioner's eligibility under the other two Dhanasar 
prongs and hereby reserve those issues. 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 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to 
reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant did not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
The Petitioner has not established that he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver 
as a matter of discretion. The petition will remain denied. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4