dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Commercial Pilot

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 22, 2023 In Re: 28453953 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a commercial 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 ofChawathe , 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christa's, Inc. , 26 I&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. 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. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&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. 
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 I&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. 
In this instance, the Petitioner seeks to work as a commercial pilot in the United States. 1 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 I&NDec. at 376 (citingMatterc!fE-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'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 
ofDhanasar, 26 I&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)(l), 
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 brief reiterates the petition's claim 
that the Petitioner will train new pilots in the United States, the record provides no farther 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 
1 The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability, 
which the record supports. 
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 ofDhanasar, 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 ofDhanasar, 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. 
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 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 I&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. 
3