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 transport pilot, proposed to work as a pilot for a U.S. airline/cargo carrier, potentially become an aviation instructor, and separately open his own flight school in Florida.
Field: aviation / airline piloting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; this was not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Overall, we have insufficient information concerning the proposed endeavor with which to determine whether it has both substantial merit and national importance because the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has not been clearly defined.”
“we conclude that the Petitioner has not provided a specific or consistent proposed endeavor activity such that we can determine its substantial merit and national importance.”
“how one pilot will improve a national shortage or will trigger substantial positive economic impacts has not been explained.”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“simply having a global route does not establish that the endeavor has a global impact.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“he has not provided sufficient information of how his services in these areas would rise to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · ignored
- other · discounted
“While these articles provide useful background information, they are of limited value in this matter, as the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor is unclear.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- 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
Notable
Petitioner's endeavor was multi-pronged and shifting (pilot, instructor, flight-school owner) without a clear timeline or hierarchy; AAO treated this ambiguity itself as the central defect underlying the national importance failure.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
The proposed endeavor itself was never clearly defined (multiple concurrent, undifferentiated roles), making it impossible to assess substantial merit or national importance.
Define a single, concrete endeavor with a clear scope and timeline before arguing national importance; avoid listing multiple unrelated career goals as one endeavor.
vague
economic_job_creation · geographic_or_shortage_area · national_security · economic_growth_generic
person_focused
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