Beneficiary meets minimum experience requirements of offered position
AAO 为什么未被说服
The former employer letter failed to include a specific description of duties as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1). Public records showed the LLC's existence was cancelled in August 2012, undermining the claimed employment through December 2014 and casting doubt on the letter's validity.
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 former employer letter failed to include a specific description of duties as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1). Public records showed the LLC's existence was cancelled in August 2012, undermining the claimed employment through December 2014 and casting doubt on the letter's validity.
AAO found that wages paid fell short of the proffered wage in both 2017 and 2018, and while 2018 was satisfied by net income/net current assets, the 2017 shortfall was not covered. Combining net income and net current assets is improper because they measure assets over different time frames and would double-count certain assets.…
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 that wages paid fell short of the proffered wage in both 2017 and 2018, and while 2018 was satisfied by net income/net current assets, the 2017 shortfall was not covered. Combining net income and net current assets is improper because they measure assets over different time frames and would double-count certain assets. The Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances factors — business longevity, size, industry reputation, uncharacteristic losses — did not tip the balance in the Petitioner's favor given declining revenues and small operations.
AAO held that satisfying the awards criterion does not bootstrap the contributions criterion, that the analysis is independent, and that previously submitted reference letters lacked sufficient detail and documentary support to show major significance; new letters submitted on motion could not be considered.
为什么值得参考
区分“工作具有原创性”与“原创贡献对整个领域具有重大意义”的证明。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO held that satisfying the awards criterion does not bootstrap the contributions criterion, that the analysis is independent, and that previously submitted reference letters lacked sufficient detail and documentary support to show major significance; new letters submitted on motion could not be considered.
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO held that exclusivity alone, which can be based on factors like education or experience, does not satisfy the criterion, and the evidence did not show that members are required in all cases to be selected based on outstanding achievements.
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 held that exclusivity alone, which can be based on factors like education or experience, does not satisfy the criterion, and the evidence did not show that members are required in all cases to be selected based on outstanding achievements.
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO held that title alone is insufficient and that the evidence showed leadership only of a single committee/commission, not of the broader organization itself.
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 held that title alone is insufficient and that the evidence showed leadership only of a single committee/commission, not of the broader organization itself.
The record did not include wage statistics or other evidence showing that the Petitioner's earnings were high relative to other computer systems engineers.
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 record did not include wage statistics or other evidence showing that the Petitioner's earnings were high relative to other computer systems engineers.
Leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner did not establish where her positions fit in the organizational hierarchy, the letters did not show her roles were leading or critical for the organizations overall, and she did not demonstrate that the organizations had a distinguished reputation.
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 establish where her positions fit in the organizational hierarchy, the letters did not show her roles were leading or critical for the organizations overall, and she did not demonstrate that the organizations had a distinguished reputation.
Original contributions of major significance in the field
AAO 为什么未被说服
The employer letters lacked sufficient detail explaining how the Petitioner's contributions were of major significance to the field at large, rather than just to her employers, and the record lacked corroborating documentation.
为什么值得参考
区分“工作具有原创性”与“原创贡献对整个领域具有重大意义”的证明。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The employer letters lacked sufficient detail explaining how the Petitioner's contributions were of major significance to the field at large, rather than just to her employers, and the record lacked corroborating documentation.
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Cisco certification represented completion of training rather than membership based on outstanding achievements; the church membership was not shown to require outstanding achievements in computer systems engineering; and the IEEE affiliate membership post-dated the filing of the petition.
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 Cisco certification represented completion of training rather than membership based on outstanding achievements; the church membership was not shown to require outstanding achievements in computer systems engineering; and the IEEE affiliate membership post-dated the filing of the petition.