AAO withdrew the Director's prong-one finding because the threshold EB-2 qualification finding was itself withdrawn, and remanded for a new determination.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO withdrew the Director's prong-one finding because the threshold EB-2 qualification finding was itself withdrawn, and remanded for a new determination.
The AAO found the record did not establish the Petitioner would actually work as a postsecondary education administrator, since her company is an educational consultancy, not a postsecondary institution. Even if the endeavor were as described, any benefits would accrue locally to the company, subsidiaries, and clients without demonstrating national-level implications.…
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The AAO found the record did not establish the Petitioner would actually work as a postsecondary education administrator, since her company is an educational consultancy, not a postsecondary institution. Even if the endeavor were as described, any benefits would accrue locally to the company, subsidiaries, and clients without demonstrating national-level implications. Job creation projections of 14 direct and 29 indirect jobs did not establish substantial positive economic effects, and the Petitioner did not show those workplaces were in economically depressed areas.
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the Director's third-prong analysis incomplete because it failed to address all of the Petitioner's arguments, and remanded for a full analysis addressing all arguments and evidence with explanation of the weight given to each balancing factor.
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the Director's third-prong analysis incomplete because it failed to address all of the Petitioner's arguments, and remanded for a full analysis addressing all arguments and evidence with explanation of the weight given to each balancing factor.
AAO found the Director's second-prong determination insufficient because it did not identify the underlying evidence or sufficiently explain the basis for the conclusion, requiring further analysis on remand.
为什么值得参考
识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣，以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the Director's second-prong determination insufficient because it did not identify the underlying evidence or sufficiently explain the basis for the conclusion, requiring further analysis on remand.
AAO agreed with the Director's rejection of the STEM shortage and COVID-19 arguments, but found the Director failed to adequately address all evidence, including the expert opinion letter, and remanded for a full analysis of whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national or global financial implications or significant potential to employ U.S. workers.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO agreed with the Director's rejection of the STEM shortage and COVID-19 arguments, but found the Director failed to adequately address all evidence, including the expert opinion letter, and remanded for a full analysis of whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national or global financial implications or significant potential to employ U.S. workers.
Five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience via employer letters
AAO 为什么未被说服
The credentials evaluation and athlete letters are not employer letters as required by regulation. The federation letter does not address coaching experience or dates. The Petitioner also overstated his experience at filing—his degree was dated January 2009 and the petition filed August 2018, making at most nine years and seven months of post-baccalaureate experience possible.
为什么值得参考
利用裁决理由识别 AAO 认为重要的具体事实或文件缺口。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The credentials evaluation and athlete letters are not employer letters as required by regulation. The federation letter does not address coaching experience or dates. The Petitioner also overstated his experience at filing—his degree was dated January 2009 and the petition filed August 2018, making at most nine years and seven months of post-baccalaureate experience possible.
AAO found that while the endeavor had substantial merit, it did not rise to the level of national importance because working at a healthcare facility would benefit only the employer and its patients, without national or global implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects.…
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that while the endeavor had substantial merit, it did not rise to the level of national importance because working at a healthcare facility would benefit only the employer and its patients, without national or global implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects. General discussions of the physical therapy profession and healthcare trends did not address the specific proposed endeavor.
AAO agreed the second prong was not met because the record did not establish that the Petitioner held a U.S. physical therapy license at the time of filing, or that she was even qualified to take the licensing exam.
为什么值得参考
识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣，以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO agreed the second prong was not met because the record did not establish that the Petitioner held a U.S. physical therapy license at the time of filing, or that she was even qualified to take the licensing exam.