dismissedNOV162023_04B52032023-11-16 · 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 airline first officer/captain, proposed to continue working as a commercial pilot in the United States.

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

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner did not establish that his specific proposed endeavor has national importance”

“the impact of that endeavor would be limited to the Petitioner's employers and would not broadly impact the aviation industry or offer benefits at the national level”

“labor shortages are addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through though the labor certification process and thus they are not a compelling reason to grant a national interest waiver”

“a first-prong analysis of national importance focuses on the Petitioner's specific endeavor, rather than the importance of the field or profession of that endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“did not explain how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would address any industry shortages”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“indicating that he broadly considered the cumulative impact of pilots in general rather than focusing on his specific endeavor”
AAO decision text
motion resubmission · discounted
“the previously submitted evidence, some of which has been resubmitted on appeal, corroborates the claim that his endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text

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

1,619coded 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

AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's decision under Matter of Burbano rather than conducting fully independent analysis; expert letters on industry-wide pilot shortage and aviation's economic importance were found insufficient because they addressed the field generally rather than the Petitioner's specific endeavor.

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
Chen v. INS
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer