NIW Bearings
dismissedMAY292025_03B52032025-05-29 · motion_reopen

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.

A Honduran military-trained commercial pilot and flight instructor sought to work in the U.S. as a flight instructor and/or commercial pilot, later describing evolving plans including entrepreneurial aviation-education ventures.

Field: aviation / commercial piloting and flight instruction · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner failed to establish an advanced degree or its equivalent (no transcript/credential evaluation for master's degree; three-year Mexican diploma not shown equivalent to U.S. bachelor's), failed to show his intended occupation (commercial pilot/flight instructor) requires a bachelor's degree as minimum entry requirement, and failed to meet at least three of six exceptional-ability criteria (only 2 of 6 satisfied: academic record and licensure).

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner has provided an evolving description of his proposed endeavor that includes material changes to the endeavor described at the time of filing.”
“he does not provide any detail or corroborating evidence on the claimed economic impact and hiring potential, such as financial or employment projections directly attributable to his proposed work”
“the importance of an endeavor is determined by its specific potential prospective impact, not by the industry or occupation it involves”
“Proposing to work in an occupation with a national shortage or serve in a consulting capacity for others seeking to work in an occupation with a national shortage alone, is insufficient”
“it is not apparent that the Petitioner's proposed activities would operate on such a scale as to rise to the level of national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · discounted
    “the record still does not contain a complete official academic record”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “none of the letters contained a detailed description of the duties he performed”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “does not otherwise demonstrate that either association constitutes a professional association”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “none of the authors discussed the Petitioner's proposed future endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “they do not address the potential economic effects of the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake”
    AAO decision text
All 8 evidence items
  • contract revenue · discounted
    “The evidence provided is insufficient to support his claim that he has commanded remuneration for his services that demonstrates exceptional ability”
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · discounted
    “he asserts in his response to the service motion that the previously submitted evidence was sufficient to establish his eligibility”
    AAO decision text
  • awards · discounted
    “the certificates alone do not detail whether or how the Petitioner has significantly contributed to his industry or field”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • 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
  • 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

Unusual procedural posture: AAO issued its own sua sponte 'service motion to reopen' after dismissing the appeal, to request additional evidence, then dismissed again on multiple independent alternate grounds (advanced degree, exceptional ability, and NIW prong 1), with prongs 2 and 3 expressly reserved as unnecessary.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of Ho
  • Matter of Izummi
  • Matter of Katigbak

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer