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 B737NG simulator instructor, sought a national interest waiver to work in the United States as an aviation consultant and trainer, having formed a U.S. aviation consulting and training company.
Field: aviation training / simulator instruction · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner has not provided new facts to establish that we erred in dismissing the motion to reopen or that would otherwise warrant reopening of the proceeding”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the scope of the present motion is limited to the correctness of our prior decision dismissing the motion to reopen”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the scope of the present motion is limited to the correctness of our prior decision dismissing the motion to reopen”
AAO decision text
This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
This decision does not reach the merits of the NIW petition at all. The AAO dismissed on purely procedural grounds: the prior motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner submitted only a receipt notice for a newly filed I-140 (not substantive new evidence), and the current combined motion failed to identify legal or policy error in that dismissal or to supply genuinely new facts. The Petitioner's newly submitted evidence — simulator training logs, company formation documents, U.S. recognitions, and professional memberships — was not evaluated on the merits because the motion's scope was limited to the correctness of the prior procedural dismissal. The case has now been denied at the service center, on appeal, and on two successive motions without any merits adjudication of the three Dhanasar prongs.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to satisfy motion requirements: no new facts curing prior reopen deficiency, and no identified legal/policy error in prior decision to support reconsideration.
On motion, submit new evidence directly addressing the specific defect identified, and pinpoint concrete legal/policy errors rather than relitigating the merits.
vague
mixed
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