The Petitioner did not address the Director's determination regarding professional association membership on appeal, so AAO considered that claim abandoned.
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 Petitioner did not address the Director's determination regarding professional association membership on appeal, so AAO considered that claim abandoned.
Five years of qualifying post-baccalaureate experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
Even assuming the master's degree qualifies as a baccalaureate equivalent, the Beneficiary had only about fifteen months of post-degree experience before joining the Petitioner, far short of the required five years. All prior experience with the former employer predated the baccalaureate-equivalent degree and therefore was not qualifying 'post-baccalaureate' experience.…
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 +
Even assuming the master's degree qualifies as a baccalaureate equivalent, the Beneficiary had only about fifteen months of post-degree experience before joining the Petitioner, far short of the required five years. All prior experience with the former employer predated the baccalaureate-equivalent degree and therefore was not qualifying 'post-baccalaureate' experience. Experience with the Petitioner itself is also non-qualifying per the labor certification.
Minimum baccalaureate-level degree in qualifying field
AAO 为什么未被说服
The civil engineering diploma was awarded by a non-degree-granting institution and was explicitly labeled a 'Diploma Course of Study,' not a baccalaureate program. The academic evaluations asserting baccalaureate equivalency were given little probative weight because they were inconsistent with the record evidence.
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 civil engineering diploma was awarded by a non-degree-granting institution and was explicitly labeled a 'Diploma Course of Study,' not a baccalaureate program. The academic evaluations asserting baccalaureate equivalency were given little probative weight because they were inconsistent with the record evidence.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the submitted materials related only to the Petitioner's work on specific projects benefiting his employer and its clients, not to achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field as required by the regulation.
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 +
AAO found the submitted materials related only to the Petitioner's work on specific projects benefiting his employer and its clients, not to achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field as required by the regulation.