The Petitioner, a commercial pilot and flight instructor, proposed to continue piloting aircraft and training other pilots in the United States, asserting broad benefits to the aviation industry and economy.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record did not establish that the generalized plan to pilot aircrafts and train other pilots would have the type of "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances"”

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake."”

“a discussion of the Petitioner's prior experience and its importance abroad does not address how the specific, prospective endeavor may have national importance in the United States.”

“the Director erred in finding his work will only benefit his future employer and clients, and placed too much weight on whether he will create jobs.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• resume experience · discounted

  “a discussion of the Petitioner's prior experience and its importance abroad does not address how the specific, prospective endeavor may have national importance”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “The Petitioner cites to previously submitted recommendation and employment offer letters and claims that we failed to consider them.”

  AAO decision text
• motion resubmission · discounted

  “The Petitioner cannot meet the requirements of a motion to reconsider by broadly disagreeing with our conclusions”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the nation will experience undue economic hardship if the shortage is not fixed”

  AAO decision text
• certification membership · ignored

Where this case turned

• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• 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

Notable

This is a motion to reconsider following a prior AAO appellate dismissal; the AAO expressly declines to revisit the exceptional-ability threshold and Dhanasar prongs 2-3, having already found prong 1 dispositive in the earlier decision. The Petitioner's argument analogizing pilot training to nationally-distributed manufactured products (citing unpublished Matter of E-J-C-D-H-) was rejected as non-precedential and non-binding.

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(c)
• 8 C.F.R. 103.5
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
• Matter of Coelho
• Matter of E-M-
• Matter of O-S-G-

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