AAO explicitly declined to reach the second prong because the Petitioner had not established the specific proposed endeavor required to evaluate it, rendering further analysis purposeless.
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 explicitly declined to reach the second prong because the Petitioner had not established the specific proposed endeavor required to evaluate it, rendering further analysis purposeless.
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement
裁决如何说明
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong as the Petitioner failed to establish the first prong and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
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 explicitly declined to reach the third prong as the Petitioner failed to establish the first prong and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
AAO found that significant unresolved questions existed about the particulars of the petitioner's proposed endeavor, including inconsistency between his adjunct instructor duties and research activities, an apparently incorrect SOC code selection, and materially changed research focus introduced on motion.…
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 significant unresolved questions existed about the particulars of the petitioner's proposed endeavor, including inconsistency between his adjunct instructor duties and research activities, an apparently incorrect SOC code selection, and materially changed research focus introduced on motion. Because the petitioner did not provide consistent information about his proposed endeavor, AAO withdrew the director's finding that prong one was met.
AAO found the Petitioner sufficiently showed substantial merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor through reference letters and documentation establishing that artificial lift is used in nearly all U.S. oil wells and is of broad national significance.
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 sufficiently showed substantial merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor through reference letters and documentation establishing that artificial lift is used in nearly all U.S. oil wells and is of broad national significance.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific endeavor with demonstrated national importance, noting the evidence documented the general importance of the IT field but did not explain how his particular proposed work would have national importance beyond his prospective employing organizations and their clients.…
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 that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific endeavor with demonstrated national importance, noting the evidence documented the general importance of the IT field but did not explain how his particular proposed work would have national importance beyond his prospective employing organizations and their clients. Post-filing incorporation documents were not considered because eligibility must be established at the time of filing.
AAO withdrew the Director's favorable finding, concluding that while the Petitioner is a competent software developer, the evidence was insufficient to show a record of success, a tangible plan for future activities, demonstrated progress toward the proposed endeavor, or interest from potential customers or investors.…
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 withdrew the Director's favorable finding, concluding that while the Petitioner is a competent software developer, the evidence was insufficient to show a record of success, a tangible plan for future activities, demonstrated progress toward the proposed endeavor, or interest from potential customers or investors. AAO also found that the Petitioner's assertions about the significance of his past projects were not substantiated by the supporting letters.
AAO acknowledged that the Petitioner's proposed work as an architectural drafter has substantial merit, but found insufficient evidence that its prospective impact rises to national importance. The record showed no significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic effects nationally, and the endeavor would not impact the field or U.S.…
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 acknowledged that the Petitioner's proposed work as an architectural drafter has substantial merit, but found insufficient evidence that its prospective impact rises to national importance. The record showed no significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic effects nationally, and the endeavor would not impact the field or U.S. healthcare industry more broadly beyond the Petitioner's employers and their clientele.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner failed to sufficiently identify a specific proposed endeavor with substantial merit and national importance. The Petitioner offered only high-level descriptions of broad areas of expertise and general statements about possibly consulting for federal agencies, without detailing a specific endeavor or demonstrating its prospective national 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 +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner failed to sufficiently identify a specific proposed endeavor with substantial merit and national importance. The Petitioner offered only high-level descriptions of broad areas of expertise and general statements about possibly consulting for federal agencies, without detailing a specific endeavor or demonstrating its prospective national impact. The expert opinion letter was not probative because it conflated the Dhanasar first prong with the vacated NYSDOT framework and focused on the Petitioner's qualifications rather than the proposed endeavor.
AAO agreed the proposed taekwondo work has substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. The record did not show his competing or coaching would impact USA Taekwondo, the national team, or the sport more broadly, nor that the endeavor would generate significant job creation or 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 agreed the proposed taekwondo work has substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. The record did not show his competing or coaching would impact USA Taekwondo, the national team, or the sport more broadly, nor that the endeavor would generate significant job creation or substantial positive economic effects.