AAO held that under 8 C.F.R. § 1.2, legal holidays are counted within the filing period unless the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. December 22, 2015 — the last day of the period — was none of those, so the motion filed December 23, 2015 (34 days after the decision) was untimely. The Petitioner's interpretation was inconsistent with the regulation and unsupported by precedent or USCIS policy.
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 under 8 C.F.R. § 1.2, legal holidays are counted within the filing period unless the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. December 22, 2015 — the last day of the period — was none of those, so the motion filed December 23, 2015 (34 days after the decision) was untimely. The Petitioner's interpretation was inconsistent with the regulation and unsupported by precedent or USCIS policy.
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
证据为何得到认可
AAO found that the record reflects the Petitioner has performed at artistic exhibitions and showcases, and accordingly concluded she meets this criterion.
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 the record reflects the Petitioner has performed at artistic exhibitions and showcases, and accordingly concluded she meets this criterion.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's consulting activities—analyzing business strategies, issuing traffic reports, and making client recommendations—do not constitute participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
为什么值得参考
了解评审邀请、已完成任务及评审性质如何被记录和衡量。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's consulting activities—analyzing business strategies, issuing traffic reports, and making client recommendations—do not constitute participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
AAO agreed with the Director, finding that the letters and client documentation did not show the Petitioner's work widely affected the field beyond his individual clients' projects or otherwise rose to the level of major significance in the field as a whole.
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 agreed with the Director, finding that the letters and client documentation did not show the Petitioner's work widely affected the field beyond his individual clients' projects or otherwise rose to the level of major significance in the field as a whole.
AAO found the LinkedIn articles did not qualify as scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media, noting no evidence they were scholarly in nature or that LinkedIn's platform constitutes a professional publication in digital marketing.
为什么值得参考
了解 AAO 如何判断作品是否属于学术论文，以及它在整体记录中说明什么。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the LinkedIn articles did not qualify as scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media, noting no evidence they were scholarly in nature or that LinkedIn's platform constitutes a professional publication in digital marketing.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner fulfilled the leading or critical role criterion, noting the record reflects he performed in a critical role as a digital marketing consultant for an organization with 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 +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner fulfilled the leading or critical role criterion, noting the record reflects he performed in a critical role as a digital marketing consultant for an organization with a distinguished reputation.
AAO concluded that the Petitioner's judging experience did not distinguish him from others at the top; his three articles and book chapter with only 31 total citations did not demonstrate sustained acclaim; his salary above the 75th percentile but below the 90th percentile was insufficient; his memberships were open to all certified physicians; and his recommendation letters lacked specifics showing major significance or un…
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 concluded that the Petitioner's judging experience did not distinguish him from others at the top; his three articles and book chapter with only 31 total citations did not demonstrate sustained acclaim; his salary above the 75th percentile but below the 90th percentile was insufficient; his memberships were open to all certified physicians; and his recommendation letters lacked specifics showing major significance or unusual influence.
Final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that even considering all evidence in the aggregate, the petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.…
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 even considering all evidence in the aggregate, the petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. Download statistics do not establish significant impact on the field, the publication history is modest, the judging evidence was incomplete, and no leading or critical roles beyond his recently-obtained employment were demonstrated.