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 Venezuelan-born commercial pilot with a job offer from a major U.S. airline, sought to work in the United States as a commercial airline pilot.
Field: commercial aviation / airline piloting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found the petitioner eligible as a noncitizen of exceptional ability but failed to conduct a detailed final merits determination; AAO withdrew that finding for lack of analysis and reserved the eligibility question since the appeal was resolved on national importance grounds.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The scope of the impact is too narrow to be in the national interest.”
“He has not explained how his specific employment, alone, would affect the economy or the airline industry on a national level.”
“has not sufficiently demonstrated that his specific endeavor: would nationally affect the airline industry or the economy, including an economically depressed area; has significant potential to employ U.S. workers; or would broadly enhance societal welfare”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · credited
- certification membership · credited
Where this case turned
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
AAO withdrew the Director's exceptional-ability finding as unsupported by analysis, but declined to resolve the threshold EB-2 question or reach prongs 2 and 3, affirming denial solely on the national-importance element under a Bagamasbad/L-A-C- 'no need to reach alternate issues' rationale. AAO also rejected the petitioner's argument that the Director overemphasized geography, finding no such error in the record.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod