The new evidence did not identify the specific research projects the Petitioner plans to undertake in the United States or demonstrate that his teaching activities have broader national implications beyond the students at his university. The GSA invitation letter did not identify specific research or teaching projects, and the teaching-related documents showed only university-level impact.…
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 new evidence did not identify the specific research projects the Petitioner plans to undertake in the United States or demonstrate that his teaching activities have broader national implications beyond the students at his university. The GSA invitation letter did not identify specific research or teaching projects, and the teaching-related documents showed only university-level impact. The Petitioner still failed to clarify which of his many proposed research topics he would pursue.
on balance, beneficial to waive the job offer and labor certification requirements
裁决如何说明
AAO reserved this prong for consideration on remand, instructing the Director to analyze all three Dhanasar prongs if the proposed endeavor is sufficiently established.
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 reserved this prong for consideration on remand, instructing the Director to analyze all three Dhanasar prongs if the proposed endeavor is sufficiently established.
AAO noted the Director failed to address this prong and remanded for the Director to make the determination, noting that the proposed endeavor must be sufficiently and consistently established before Dhanasar prong 1 can be analyzed.
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 noted the Director failed to address this prong and remanded for the Director to make the determination, noting that the proposed endeavor must be sufficiently and consistently established before Dhanasar prong 1 can be analyzed.
AAO reserved this prong for the Director on remand, noting concerns about whether the Petitioner has established the nature of his involvement in proposed research projects, such as for whom research is performed and sources of funding.
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 reserved this prong for the Director on remand, noting concerns about whether the Petitioner has established the nature of his involvement in proposed research projects, such as for whom research is performed and sources of funding.
The evaluations were inconsistent and contradictory (differing on whether the degree was in geophysics or geophysical engineering, and whether earned in four, five, or seven years), transcripts were never submitted despite an RFE, and USCIS cannot independently verify the evaluators' conclusions. The AAO withdrew the Director's finding.
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 evaluations were inconsistent and contradictory (differing on whether the degree was in geophysics or geophysical engineering, and whether earned in four, five, or seven years), transcripts were never submitted despite an RFE, and USCIS cannot independently verify the evaluators' conclusions. The AAO withdrew the Director's finding.
The AAO withdrew the Director's finding because the record was inconsistent and insufficient on her education; post-filing activities (2019 conference presentation and 2020 peer review) could not establish eligibility at the time of filing; it was unclear whether she was currently employed; and there was insufficient evidence of clients, income, or a clear plan for carrying out the endeavor.
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 +
The AAO withdrew the Director's finding because the record was inconsistent and insufficient on her education; post-filing activities (2019 conference presentation and 2020 peer review) could not establish eligibility at the time of filing; it was unclear whether she was currently employed; and there was insufficient evidence of clients, income, or a clear plan for carrying out the endeavor.
The AAO agreed that the primary benefits of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor accrue to specific companies and clients rather than to the nation broadly. The Petitioner conflated the importance of the oil and gas industry generally with the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor.…
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 agreed that the primary benefits of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor accrue to specific companies and clients rather than to the nation broadly. The Petitioner conflated the importance of the oil and gas industry generally with the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor. The record did not show novel methodologies, broader field impact, or a direct link between her work and national-level economic or energy impacts.
AAO found the Petitioner had not identified a specific, consistent proposed endeavor, having shifted focus from engine analysis to broad CAE and structural analysis methods across multiple applications. Because no specific endeavor was identified, its national importance could not be assessed.
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 the Petitioner had not identified a specific, consistent proposed endeavor, having shifted focus from engine analysis to broad CAE and structural analysis methods across multiple applications. Because no specific endeavor was identified, its national importance could not be assessed.