dismissedNOV092023_02B52032023-11-09 · appeal · Nebraska Service Center

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, an aircraft pilot, proposed to work as a pilot for U.S. airlines and to train other pilots, addressing what he described as an industry-wide shortage of pilots in the U.S.

Field: aviation / aircraft piloting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Director found the Petitioner did not establish exceptional ability (lacking expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered), though he met at least three of the six regulatory criteria. The AAO expressly reserved judgment on this issue since it disposed of the case on prong 1 national importance grounds.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the fact that there is a demand for [p]ilots in the United States does not render the proposed endeavor nationally important by default.”

“the proposed endeavor of piloting aircraft and training other pilots appears to benefit the Petitioner's existing and potential employers, and the clients or passengers of those companies.”

“the record does not establish how a generalized, industry-wide demand for pilots ... may have "national or even global implications within a particular field"”

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work”

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
other · discounted
“the record does not establish how a generalized, industry-wide demand for pilots ... may have national or even global implications”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
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

746coded 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

The AAO noted the record contained 'directly conflicting statements' regarding whether the proposed endeavor had substantial merit, but declined to resolve this, resting dismissal solely on national importance. The AAO also declined to reach the threshold exceptional-ability determination despite the Director's adverse finding there.

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-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer