dismissedAPR172023_06B52032023-04-17 · appeal · Texas Service Center
This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.
The petitioner, a commercial/private pilot with over 10,000 flight hours, sought to continue working as an airline pilot in the U.S. and to become a flight instructor and examiner to train new pilots, citing a pilot shortage.
Field: commercial aviation / airline piloting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his services as a pilot or instructor rather than the national importance of pilots, the aviation industry, or the wide range of business fields or industries impacted by aviation.”
“The record does not show how his individual pilot or teaching services stand to sufficiently extend beyond his potential or futuristic employers or students, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“It is important to note that the shortage of pilots, as well as aviation instructors, does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”
“Without relevant evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to his specific services as a pilot or aviation instructor, the record does not show any benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“the shortage of pilots, as well as aviation instructors, does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
AAO explicitly distinguishes STEM endeavors from the petitioner's pilot/instructor endeavor, noting a shortage of workers is addressed via labor certification rather than NIW; decision also notes Director's harmless procedural error regarding appeal rights.
Authorities this decision leans on
From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp