Pilot

The Petitioner, a pilot, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1 l 53(b )(2).

The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish that the Petitioner is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.

The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de novo. Matter of Christa's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.

Law

To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification for the underlying EB-2 visa classification as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. Id.

Profession is defined as one of the occupations listed in section 101(a)(32) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 110l(a)(32), 1 as well as any occupation for which a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry into the occupation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 1 Profession shall include, but not be limited to, architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries. Section 10l(a)(32) of the Act. p. 2 Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion2, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that:

• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance;
• The individual is well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.

Id.

The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range ofareas, such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id.

The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the individual. To determine whether they are well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, but not limited to: their education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals. Id. at 890. The third prong requires a petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing this analysis, we may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the individual's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for them to secure a job offer or to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from their contributions; and whether the national interest in their contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) considered must, taken together, establish that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements ofa job offer and thus ofa labor certification. Id. at 890-91.

Analysis

The Petitioner proposed to work in the United States as a pilot, a flight simulator instructor, a flight standards specialist, and an extended twin-engine operations (ETOPS) expert in the field of aviation. 2 See Flores v. Garland. 72 F.4th 85. 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, District of Columbia, and Third Circuit Courts in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). p. 3 The Petitioner must first demonstrate qualification for the underlying EB-2 visa classification as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. The Director determined that the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 visa classification as an individual holding an advanced degree based on his bachelor's degree in business administration from ________________ and letters from his employers showing that he has at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty, and we agree. The remaining issue on appeal is whether the Petitioner is eligible or otherwise merits a waiver of that classification's job offer requirement.

The Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to work as a pilot in the field of aviation has both substantial merit and national importance, but the Petitioner has not established that he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor and that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification.Did not show the waiver outweighs labor certification On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director did not consider all the evidence submitted and maintains that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor and that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. Upon de novo review, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established national importance of his proposed endeavor.

In support of his claims of national importance, the Petitioner claims that he will work as a pilot in executive, commercial, and cargo American aviation, will carry passengers and cargo safely, fulfilling schedules, and avoiding flight delays, and will contribute to clients' satisfaction and enhance tourism and business trade. The Petitioner also asserts that he will serve as a special cargo and dangerous goods pilot for airlines and transportation companies and will export American products worldwide, helping the U.S. economic growth. The record contains expert opinion letters, recommendation letters, various articles and reports, and other evidence in support of his claim. While we may not address each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one.

The record includes an expert opinion letter from I Ian aviation coordinator and a lecturer at I I which describes the Petitioner's proposed endeavor in detail.

Professor I I asserts that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance because aviation plays a critical role in the U.S. economy and is an important contributor to the country's gross domestic product, is essential for facilitating global trade as it enables the transportation of goods and products across the world, and has a significant social impact, connecting people and cultures across the country and the world, promoting tourism, and contributing to local and national economies. The Petitioner provided statistics on air traffic. He also submitted various articles about air cargo traffic, the economic impact of commercial aviation, the importance of air cargo to the global economy, the economic and social benefits of air transport, shipping perishable goods and live animals, and shipping dangerous goods.

The expert opinion letter and articles discuss the economic and social benefits of aviation and the importance of air cargo to the global economy. However, in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work. Instead, we focus on the specific endeavor that the noncitizen proposes to undertake. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. As such, the Petitioner must demonstrate by a preponderance of the p. 4 evidence that his proposed endeavor - to work as a pilot, a flight simulator instructor, a flight standards specialist, and an ETOPS expert in the field of aviation - is of national importance.

The articles and reports do not directly address the Petitioner's specific proposed undertaking and do not adequately explain how his proposed endeavor offers benefits that extend beyond his employer and their customers to impact the field ofaviation, the trade industry, the shipping industry, the tourism industry, or the U.S. economy more broadly.No broader implications shown The expert opinion letter discusses about the field of aviation but not the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. In Dhanasar, we indicated that we look for broader implications of the proposed endeavor and that an undertaking may have national importance, for example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field. See id. at 889. While the Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide services as a pilot for airlines and transportation companies and their customers, the expert opinion letter, articles, and reports do not address the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. Without sufficient documentary evidence of its broader impact, the Petitioner has not established by a preponderance of the evidence that his proposed endeavor meets the national importance element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.Proposed endeavor too vague

In addition, the Petitioner claims that he will work in the United States in an area of substantial merit and national importance. Professor I Ialso states that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance because the proposed endeavor impacts a matter that a government entity has described as having national importance or is the subject of national initiatives. Professor I Iadds that in 2020, the U.S. government launched the Aviation Jobs Protection Program to support aviation industry workers who were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and that in 2022, several U.S. Senators introduced the Let Experienced Pilots Fly Act to address flight cancellations that have been caused by the ongoing pilot shortage.

The Petitioner also submitted evidence of some U.S. government initiatives demonstrating the importance of pilots in the aviation industry. For example, he presented National Aviation Safety Plan published by the Federal A via ti on Administration (FAA) in 2022 to pursue the highest level of safety in the national airspace system and improve aviation safety. He also presented a document published in the Federal Register in 2020 about the FAA's aircraft pilot workforce development grant program. He provided an article about the Forces to Flyers Research Initiatives, an initiative launched by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2017 to train non-pilot veterans to become commercial pilots. He submitted a press release published in the FAA website, which shows that in 2023, the FAA awarded about $1 billion from President Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to 99 airports across the country to help meet the growing demand for air travel and improve airports infrastructure and the passenger expenence.

While the U.S. government initiatives show the government's support for aviation industry workers and airports infrastructure, address the shortage of commercial pilots, emphasize aviation safety, and recognize the importance of pilots and the airline industry to the U.S. economy and national security, they do not indicate that the government has a particular interest in the Petitioner's planned employment activities.Relied on a labor shortage The record does not sufficiently demonstrate how his planned employment activities will make an impact on a matter that a government entity has described as having national importance or is the subject of national initiatives.

The Petitioner also claims that his proposed endeavor to work as a flight instructor and train and multiply the U.S. workforce to act in the aviation industry is of national importance because he will contribute to mitigating the shortage of professionals in the area. He explained that U.S. airlines hope to add 13,000 pilots this year, but America produces only 5,000 and 7,000 pilots annually and that the pilot shortage for the industry is real and grave. To support this claim, the Petitioner submitted articles about an airline pilot shortage.

In this case, the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor to work as a flight instructor stands to impact or significantly reduce the claimed national shortage. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Labor addresses worker shortages through the labor certification process. See 20 C.F.R. § 656, 8 U.S.C. § l 182(a)(5)(A), 1182(p)(l). Therefore, a shortage of qualified professionals alone is not sufficient to demonstrate eligibility for the national interest waiver.

As for the economic value and job creation that the Petitioner will offer, the record contains an economic impact analysis from _____ a business and technology consultant at I I I I Mr. I I claims that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has the potential of generating important economic impact in the United States, including increase in economic activity, creation ofhundreds ofjobs, increase in wages and salaries, and increase in tax revenue for the federal, state, and local governments. Mr. I Ifurther asserts that considering an average of 3 hours per flight, a maximum of 1,000 hours per year that a pilot can fly, a capacity of 166 passengers per flight on a Boeing 737-800/ Airbus A321, and an average airfare of $327, the Petitioner has the potential of generating $18,101,747 in yearly revenue and $90,508,733 in total revenue for five years for airline companies in the United States. Mr.I I also asserts that the total estimated impact in the U.S. economy will be $156,000,000 in a period of 5 years with the potential of creating 559 new jobs. However, the record does not contain sufficient evidence supporting the income projections or job creation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported The preponderance of the evidence standard requires the evidence demonstrate that the petitioner's claim is probably true, where the determination of truth is made based on the factual circumstances of each individual case. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. In evaluating the evidence, truth is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality. See id. Here, lack of supporting details detracts from the credibility and probative value of the economic impact analysis.

Furthermore, even if all the projections in the economic impact analysis were realized, the record lacks sufficient evidence demonstrating that the Petitioner will have an impact on the field of aviation at a level commensurate with national importance.Past record does not show influence or success In Dhanasar, we stated that an endeavor that has a significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood to have national importance. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Here, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient evidence that he will employ a significant population of workers in an economically depressed area or that his endeavor would offer a particular U.S. region or its population a substantial economic benefit through employment levels or business activity. Therefore, the record does not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of national importance.

Additionally, the Petitioner states that he will work as a flight simulator instructor in flight schools for initial pilots, preparing them to get their licenses. He also states that he can work as an airline instructor, training co-pilots to become captains and helping them with exams. The Petitioner contends that he will transmit his knowledge of 12 years ofaviation to ensure new pilots are committed to safety procedures and standard approaches and that his services will benefit the aviation sector and societal welfare.

Regarding the Petitioner's plans to work as a flight simulator instructor and an airline instructor to train pilots, the record does not sufficiently establish that this undertaking has broader implications for the field of aviation, as opposed to being limited to those who participate in his classes or training sessions. While the Petitioner's plans to work as a flight simulator instructor and an airline instructor and disseminate his knowledge to other pilots in the field have merit, the record does not sufficiently demonstrate that his instructional or teaching activities offer benefits that extend beyond his students or trainees to impact the field of aviation more broadly. Likewise, in Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893.

The Petitioner asserts that he will conduct abnormal flights, such as in difficult weather conditions, in restricted areas, through China aerospace, or to large urban centers and airports ofcomplex approaches and that his flying experience in different areas requiring specific approaches will improve airlines' safety and will allow airlines to expand their flights to other locations. The Petitioner also claims that he will command flights to regions that require extended twin-engine operations (ETOPS) and train pilots to fly in such distances and that this operation is vital to connecting the world and making flying safer. Lastly, the Petitioner claims that he will work as a flight standards specialist, will develop, deliver, and improve audit functions related to flight operations, will oversee the development of standard work for operational teams, and will provide exterior inspections to make flight operations more efficient, safer, and less costly.

The record includes recommendation letters from his former colleagues describing the Petitioner's job responsibilities and his contributions to his former employers, aviation projects that the Petitioner had completed for his former employer, a flight operations manual, and a chart of aircraft emergency response drills, the Petitioner's flight rosters, pilot logbooks, flight plans, load sheets, and academic and training records. The Petitioner also submitted statistics on visitors on the Hawaiian Islands and various articles about volcanic ash impacts on aviation operations, volcano eruption in Hawaii, safe and efficient flight operations in regions of volcanic activity, pilot errors as the top cause of aviation accidents, flight operations in polar routes, shifting magnetic field, flight planning procedures for the North Atlantic, the world's dangerous airports, and China's reduced vertical separation minima. The record also includes an expert opinion letter from a pilot and the chief executive officer ofI lin Brazil. Mr.I I recommends the Petitioner as a highly qualified and experienced professional with over 9,000 flight hours and 24 years of aviation experience. Mr. I I states that the Petitioner can help other pilots fly safely in adverse conditions and can contribute to expanding airlines' destinations due to his ETOPS knowledge and different approaches in countries worldwide.

While the submitted evidence establish that the Petitioner has extensive aviation experience and expertise in conducting abnormal flights, commanding flights to regions that require ETOPS, and developing and delivering flight standards to ensure safety, the record does not sufficiently explain how his proposed endeavor offers benefits that extend beyond the airline company he will serve, their customers, and other pilots within the airline company to impact the field of aviation more broadly. The Petitioner's statements and supporting documents reflect his intention to provide services as a pilot, a flight standards specialist, and an ETOPS expert and his qualifications for such positions. However, he has not provided sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889.

The record also contains the Petitioner's diploma, school transcript, resume, training certificates, pilot licenses, emails from his former employer regarding his zero absenteeism, an interview article on the Petitioner published in a company website, student reports issued by the Petitioner to his former students, employment verification letters from his former employers, pay slips from his current employer, recommendation letters from his former colleagues, and his investment account statements. The Petitioner's education, work experience, professional achievements, past contributions to his former employers, pilot licenses, and financial support are relevant under the second prong of Dhanasar to support the claim that that he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. See id. at 890. The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. See id. at 889.

Because the record does not sufficiently demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Therefore, further analysis ofhis eligibility under the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar would serve no meaningful purpose, and we will reserve these issues for future consideration should the need arise. 3

Conclusion

Although the Petitioner has shown that he is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit, he has not established by a preponderance ofthe evidence that his proposed endeavor is of national importance. Accordingly, we conclude he has not demonstrated that he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.