Part H.14 describes an acceptable method for evaluating foreign credentials—not a lowered minimum educational standard. It does not permit acceptance of less than a master's degree or of combinations of lesser education and 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 +
Part H.14 describes an acceptable method for evaluating foreign credentials—not a lowered minimum educational standard. It does not permit acceptance of less than a master's degree or of combinations of lesser education and experience.
The submitted documents were not audited financial statements, contained internal inconsistencies with tax returns, did not cover years 2010-2012, and the Petitioner persistently failed to provide proffered wage information for its other I-140 beneficiaries despite repeated prior notifications.
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 submitted documents were not audited financial statements, contained internal inconsistencies with tax returns, did not cover years 2010-2012, and the Petitioner persistently failed to provide proffered wage information for its other I-140 beneficiaries despite repeated prior notifications.
The recommendation letters praised the Petitioner's skills but did not demonstrate specific contributions of major significance in the field. The film's wide release and speaking engagement also failed to show meaningful impact on the overall film industry.
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 recommendation letters praised the Petitioner's skills but did not demonstrate specific contributions of major significance in the field. The film's wide release and speaking engagement also failed to show meaningful impact on the overall film industry.
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
证据为何得到认可
AAO found that the Petitioner's film premiering at 400 movie theatres throughout the United States satisfied the artistic display criterion, disagreeing with the Director's finding on 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 Petitioner's film premiering at 400 movie theatres throughout the United States satisfied the artistic display criterion, disagreeing with the Director's finding on this criterion.
AAO declined to conduct a full final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record does not support sustained national or international acclaim.
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 declined to conduct a full final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record does not support sustained national or international acclaim.
AAO finds the Petitioner's research experience does not show he is well positioned to start, lead, and grow a drug development company, and the record lacks evidence of investor or industry interest. The publications and patents do not constitute a record of success, citations have not been shown to be frequent relative to the field, and patents have not led to commercial drug development.
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 finds the Petitioner's research experience does not show he is well positioned to start, lead, and grow a drug development company, and the record lacks evidence of investor or industry interest. The publications and patents do not constitute a record of success, citations have not been shown to be frequent relative to the field, and patents have not led to commercial drug development.
Ability to pay via totality of circumstances (Sonegawa factors and investment account)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner's tax return history did not demonstrate consistent growth or industry reputation. The investment account could not be counted as a current asset because it was not listed as such on the federal income tax returns, and the Petitioner failed to show it had the necessary liquidity to cover proffered wage obligations.
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's tax return history did not demonstrate consistent growth or industry reputation. The investment account could not be counted as a current asset because it was not listed as such on the federal income tax returns, and the Petitioner failed to show it had the necessary liquidity to cover proffered wage obligations.
Ability to pay via net income and net current assets
AAO 为什么未被说服
In 2015, the Petitioner's net income of $101,705 fell $86,750 short of the $188,455 wage deficit; in 2016, net income of $122,980 fell $154,949 short of the $277,929 deficit. In neither year did the Petitioner have any net current 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 +
In 2015, the Petitioner's net income of $101,705 fell $86,750 short of the $188,455 wage deficit; in 2016, net income of $122,980 fell $154,949 short of the $277,929 deficit. In neither year did the Petitioner have any net current assets.
The wages paid to most of the Petitioner's 18 I-140 beneficiaries were below their proffered wages in 2015, 2016, and 2017, resulting in combined deficits of $188,455.12, $277,928.68, and $266,996.83 respectively.
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 wages paid to most of the Petitioner's 18 I-140 beneficiaries were below their proffered wages in 2015, 2016, and 2017, resulting in combined deficits of $188,455.12, $277,928.68, and $266,996.83 respectively.