The Petitioner, a licensed Canadian airline pilot, sought to work as a pilot in the United States, citing a general shortage of pilots in the industry.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner does not claim nor provide sufficient evidence to establish that his proposed endeavor of working as an airline pilot has either substantial merit or national importance.”

“The fact of a shortage of U.S. workers in an occupation is not evident of a related endeavor's national importance.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“This evidence is insufficient to establish that the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance his endeavor, as he acknowledges that he is not licensed to pilot aircraft in the United States.”

AAO decision text

Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner does not claim nor provide sufficient evidence to establish that waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• degree · discounted

  “The database confirms that this level of education is comparable to completion of senior high school in the United States.”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “This evidence is insufficient to establish that the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance his endeavor.”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “only one of the letters ... confirms that he was employed full-time.”

  AAO decision text
• certification membership · credited

Where this case turned

• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
• No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
• Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
• Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground

Notable

Pro se petitioner appeared to misunderstand basic EB-2/NIW legal requirements (e.g., citing a general pilot shortage as sole basis); AAO explicitly walked through each requirement 'so that he may better understand' the denial. Petitioner failed to submit a labor certification despite RFE, which alone was deemed sufficient for denial; AAO nonetheless addressed EB-2 classification and NIW eligibility as independent alternate bases for dismissal.

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
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS
• 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