dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Aviation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 20, 2024 In Re: 31035353 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as 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 that the Petitioner established 
he is an individual of exceptional ability but did not establish that a waiver of the required job offer, 
and thus that 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 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo 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. An 
advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. 1 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. Id. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then 
establish eligibility for 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 
term "national interest," Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), provides the framework 
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. 
for adjudicating national interest waiver pet1t1ons. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as a matter of discretion, 2 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. at 889. 
IL ANALYSIS 
As an initial matter, we note that the Petitioner asserts the Director "imposed novel substantive and 
evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth in the regulations." However, he does not point to 
specific examples of this within the Director's request for evidence (RFE) or denial. The Petitioner 
also does not offer a detailed explanation for how the Director "imposed novel substantive and 
evidentiary requirements" in denying the petition or support his assertion with any pertinent law or 
regulations. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76 (standing for the proposition that a 
petitioner must support their assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence). 3 
The Petitioner also generally alleges that the Director "did not apply the proper standard of proof in 
this case, instead imposing a stricter standard, and erroneously applied the law, to [his] detriment . . .." 
The standard of proof governing immigration benefit requests is "preponderance of evidence." Id. To 
determine whether a petitioner has met its burden under the preponderance standard, we evaluate 
whether a petitioner's claims are "more likely than not" or "probably" true, but also consider the 
quality (including relevance, probative value, and credibility) of the evidence. Id. at 376; Matter of 
E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). Here, the Petitioner does not further explain or identify 
any specific instance in which the Director applied a standard of proof other than the preponderance 
of evidence in denying the petition. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. However, the 
Director's RFE explained the deficiencies and concerns in the Petitioner's initial filing relating to 
Dhanasar's three prongs and provided a non-exhaustive list of documentation and material that the 
Petitioner could submit to address such deficiencies. As such, the Director followed the applicable 
regulations and procedure in adjudicating this petition, and there is no basis in the assertion that the 
Director held the Petitioner to a higher standard of proof. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8). 
2 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
3 We find it important to point out that although we agree with the Director's overall conclusion that the Petitioner has not 
established the national importance of his proposed endeavor, the Director 's statement that "continuing employment in 
one's position, field, or industry is not an endeavor sufficient to evaluate under this analytical framework" constitutes legal 
error. See Love Korean Church v. Chertojf, 549 F.3d 749, 753- 54 (9th Cir. 2008) (standing for the proposition that 
imposing a novel evidentiary requirement is an abuse of discretion). Thus, we withdraw that portion of the Director 's 
analysis. However, because the Petitioner has not otherwise met his burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the 
record, that his endeavor is of national importance, we decline to remand the matter on this basis. 
2 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake and its "potential prospective impact." Id. at 889. 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. Id. 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. For example, while engineering is an occupation, the explanation of the proposed 
endeavor should describe the specific projects and goals, or the areas of engineering in which the 
person will work, rather than simply listing the duties and responsibilities of an engineer. 
See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. As such, we 
will first identify the Petitioner's endeavor as shown in the record. Then, we will evaluate the 
Petitioner's evidence in support of the endeavor's substantial merit and national importance. 
The Petitioner's professional plan outlines his proposed endeavor and asserts that he intends to 
continue his work as a pilot and pilot instructor. Currently, he is an Airbus 320 and Boeing 767 
instructor pilot at __________________ in Florida. He contends that his 
endeavor will have multiple benefits to the United States including mitigating the pilot shortage in 
commercial and military aviation, increasing overall airline safety, promoting air transportation of 
goods, and facilitating "all service industry [sic] in the United States economy." Apart from 
continuing his current line of work as an instructor, his endeavor includes conducting extensive 
research to implement improvements in developing and enhancing training courses, materials, and 
products that can be utilized effectively by U.S. and global airlines. The stated goal of his endeavor 
is to contribute to national aviation development, generate new job opportunities for the American 
workforce, and establish a ermanent i eline for aviation. In his role as president of the I 
he asserts he is implementing two courses 
to train low-experience pilots joining the airlines and targeting "low-time" pilots who want to learn 
multi-crew operations. As such, upon de novo review, we conclude the Petitioner proposed endeavor 
has substantial merit and withdraw the Director's determination otherwise. Because the endeavor has 
substantial merit, we tum to whether the proposed endeavor is of national importance, as contemplated 
by Dhanasar. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and asserts that the Director did not give "due regard" to his 
resume, professional plan, his "work in the field, which demonstrates his vast contributions in his 
field," letters of recommendation; and industry reports and articles "demonstrating the national 
importance of [his] proposed endeavor and the steep shortage in the U.S. of professionals with his 
profile in the field." He maintains that his endeavor is of national importance because "he is highly 
competent to address governmental concerns, all while progressively affecting the U.S. economy." 
The Petitioner asserts that his endeavor is of national importance because it includes training 
individuals to become commercial pilots at a moment when the United States is facing a shortage of 
pilots, and because the aviation industry affects many dependent industries (including trade and 
tourism, restaurants, hotels, car rentals, airlines, shopping centers, shipment of goods, entertainment 
venues and parks,) as well as "staffing those industries and more with the supplies needed." He claims 
3 
I 
his endeavor will prevent airline closures, the collapse of tourism, boost economic growth, and 
alleviate poverty.4 
The Petitioner cites to sources and statistics that paint a picture of the breadth of airline industry as 
well as how the industry impacts other areas of the economy like international trade through cargo 
shipping. 5 However, these sources and statistics do not reference his proposed endeavor, and thus 
while they speak to the substantial merit of his endeavor, they do not establish its national importance. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76 (standing for the proposition that assertions must be 
supported with relevant, credible, and probative evidence). He asserts that the aviation training 
programs he is involved in will significantly impact the aviation industry because they will provide a 
"quick and reliable supply of pilots while prioritizing safety." We acknowledge that the airline 
industry plays an important role in international trade and commerce, which speaks to the substantial 
merit of his proposed endeavor. However, in determining whether the proposed endeavor has national 
importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which 
the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national 
proposes to undertake." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
Moreover, he provides several letters to support his assertion that his endeavor is of national 
importance. While these letters help establish the substantial merit of his endeavor, they do not 
establish its national importance.Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. For example, a letter 
from his supervisor at states, "[The Petitioner's] primary responsibility is to conduct flight 
training in accordance with FAA and I I rules and regulations." The supervisor adds, "I believe 
that he is a person of national interest due to his valuable contribution to the growth and training of 
pilots within the United States and around the world." While this letter explains his endeavor's value 
to the pilots he trains and I I it does not establish that his endeavor will prevent airline closures, 
boost economic growth, alleviate poverty, or cause the other broad economic impacts he claims. Id. 
Furthermore, the letter does not corroborate his claim that he is developing training programs. Id. 
Finally, we note that the Petitioner's qualifications are the focus of Dhanasar 's second prong, when 
we examine whether he is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 890. 
The reference letters provided generally speak to his qualifications and experience in the aviation 
industry. While these letters establish that he is a pilot held in high regard by his peers and possesses 
4 We note that in an annotation to his Form I-290B, he asserts his endeavor "has a potential of broadly impacting as a 
postdoctoral research associate in the field of air and space propulsion systems." This information appears to be related to 
another individual because it does not relate to the Petitioner's endeavor. See Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 
(BIA 1988) ( standing for the proposition that any inconsistencies in a petitioner's evidence may lead to reevaluation of the 
remaining evidence offered in support of the visa petition.) 
5 For example, the Air Transport Action Group found that the "global aviation industry reached [$]2.7 trillion, about 3.5 
percent of the world's gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014." Other statistics cited to establish that his endeavor is of 
national importance include that the air transport industry supports 62. 7 million jobs globally, 9 .9 million direct jobs, over 
three million people employed by airlines, air navigation service providers, and airports, 1.1 million people employed by 
the "civil aerospace sector (the manufacture of aircraft, systems, and engines)," 5.5 million work in other on-airport 
positions, "52.8 million indirect, induced, and tourism-related jobs were supported by aviation," 1.2 billion tourists 
crossing the borders each year, in "2014, aviation supported over 36 million jobs within the tourism sector, contributing 
roughly USD $892 billion a year to global GDP," and in "2014, USD $6.4 trillion worth of goods was transported 
internationally by air, representing 35 percent of world trade by value, despite representing only 0.5 percent by volume." 
4 
valuable experience, they do not demonstrate the national importance of his endeavor. Id. The letters, 
along with some submitted reports and articles, discuss the importance of his endeavor in relation to 
the U.S. airline industry's pilot shortage. We acknowledge his assertion that his endeavor attempts to 
alleviate this shortage through training. However, a labor shortage in a particular field generally does 
not render a proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework, as the U.S. 
Department of Labor directly addresses these shortages through the labor certification process. 
Furthermore, while the Petitioner's endeavor will train pilots to enter the field, the evidence suggests 
the pilot shortage is due in part to pilot retirements and the lack of a pipeline to train future pilots. 
These are broader issues his endeavor does not address or remedy. In Dhanasar, we determined that 
while the Petitioner's "STEM teaching has substantial merit in relation to U.S. educational interests, 
the record does not indicate by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner would be engaged 
in activities that would impact the field of STEM education more broadly." Id. at 893. Similarly, 
here, while the Petitioner's endeavor includes training future pilots, this establishes the substantial 
merit of his endeavor but does not, by a preponderance of the evidence, demonstrate how the impact 
of his training courses will provide a broader solution to the pilot shortage at a level commensurate 
with national importance. 
An aviation capstone coordinator and lecturer at provides an advisory evaluation 
on the national importance of the Petitioner's endeavor. The evaluator opines that it is of national 
importance based on the Petitioner's skills, leadership positions, and experience as a pilot. The opinion 
writer also asserts that the endeavor is nationally important because airline pilot employment is 
projected to grow, and the airline industry accounts for a large part of the U.S. economy, being 
"essential in facilitating commerce and growth in developed nations, while exposing less developed 
nations to tourism and trade." However, this opinion is based entirely on the importance of the aviation 
field. Furthermore, the opinion writer does not address several aspects of the Petitioner's endeavor, 
which involves more than being a pilot but also providing training and instruction. See Matter of 
Caron Int'l, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988) (standing for the proposition that we may, in 
our discretion, use opinion statements submitted by a petitioner as advisory but, where an opinion is 
not in accord with other information or is questionable, we are not required to accept or may give less 
weight to that opinion); see also Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. Moreover, as stated 
above, the Petitioner's past professional endeavors are the focus of Dhanasar 's second prong, when 
we examine whether he is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 890. 
The Petitioner relies on industry reports and articles concerning such topics as the importance of the 
airline industry to economic growth, the negative impact the shortage of pilots is having on the 
industry, and reports from aerospace industry leaders, like Boeing, regarding the airline industry's 
commercial future in the United States. However, while the articles provide a context for some of his 
assertions, they do not specifically discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or explain how his 
endeavor would have broader implications. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. As we 
explained above, in determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, the relevant 
question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; 
instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
5 
As contemplated by Dhanasar, we examined the record to determine if there is sufficient evidence to 
conclude the Petitioner's "undertaking may have national importance ... because it has national or 
even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id. at 893. Here, the Petitioner asserts his endeavor 
includes conducting extensive research to implement improvements in developing and enhancing 
training courses, materials, and products that can be utilized effectively by U.S. airlines and globally. 
To support this assertion, he provides a professional plan and reference letters that discuss his past 
accomplishments in the field. The Petitioner's professional plan also outlines his more than 19 years 
of experience and specialized knowledge in the aviation field (including 9,000 flight hours), as well 
as his positions in the aviation field, and highlights his achievements, for example that he holds the 
highest pilot license level ("Airline Transport Pilot" from the Federal A via ti on Administration (FAA) 
and the ICAO A TPL ), and a large part of his career has been as a flight instructor, in addition to his 
role as president of the I l which develops, prepares, and conducts new training programs, 
courses, and seminars in accordance with FAA regulations and guidelines. These professional 
achievements are genera11y considered under Dhanasar 's second prong, where we consider if the 
individual is well positioned to achieve his endeavor. Id. at 890. As such, his past and present 
achievements do not establish the national importance of his endeavor. For example, a reference letter 
explains that when he was working for the ___________ he co11aborated in a 
project to develop a training course, and that "[u]nder [his] leadership, the team exhibited exceptional 
competence and diligence, and the civil aviation authority validated the program." We acknowledge 
the Petitioner's prior work bas garnered positive references; however, be has not submitted evidence 
to establish that he is developing a method of training pilots that differs from or will improve upon the 
methods already available and in use in the United States. In addition, while several reference letters 
bolster his claim that he is the president ofI I where he "devises mechanisms to identify and 
track inconsistencies, and assigns accountability for their resolution," the evidence does 
not establish his role is to create innovative curriculum but to ensure compliance with the standards 
already in place. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. 
We also explained in Dhanasar that "[a]n endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economica11y depressed 
area ... may well be understood to have national importance." Id. at 890. We acknowledge that the 
Petitioner's professional plan cites to statistics relating to the importance of the airline industry to the 
U.S. and global economy due to its impact on trade and tourism, among other economic sectors; 
however, he has not established that his proposed endeavor will specifically impact the economy at a 
level commensurate with national importance. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. In sum, we 
agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not shown that the implications of his endeavor go 
beyond any individual pilot he trains or his employers to reach the level of national importance. 
B. Dhanasar's Third Prong 
As the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor, we decline to 
reach and hereby reserve his arguments regarding his eligibility under the third prong, as well as our 
review of the Director's conclusion that he is an individual of exceptional ability, and that he is well 
positioned to achieve his endeavor. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (noting that 
"courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary 
6 
to the results they reach"); see also Matter ofL-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). 
ITT. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, 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. 
7