The petitioner's Korean doctorate in hotel tourism management was not accompanied by a credentials evaluation establishing equivalency to a U.S. degree, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A).
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 Korean doctorate in hotel tourism management was not accompanied by a credentials evaluation establishing equivalency to a U.S. degree, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A).
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
AAO 为什么未被说服
The membership card was dated more than one year after filing, failing the eligibility-at-time-of-filing requirement. Even if timely, the membership requirements did not establish that outstanding achievements are required of regular members.
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 membership card was dated more than one year after filing, failing the eligibility-at-time-of-filing requirement. Even if timely, the membership requirements did not establish that outstanding achievements are required of regular members.
published material about the individual in professional or major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
The printout provided no information about the Petitioner or his work beyond a conference abstract, and the record contained no evidence that the website qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or major media.
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 printout provided no information about the Petitioner or his work beyond a conference abstract, and the record contained no evidence that the website qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or major media.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found inconsistencies in the letter describing the award, making it impossible to determine the award was given for excellence in chemical science. Reviewer certificates were found not to meet the criterion due to discrepancies undermining reliability and the manner of their distribution.
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 inconsistencies in the letter describing the award, making it impossible to determine the award was given for excellence in chemical science. Reviewer certificates were found not to meet the criterion due to discrepancies undermining reliability and the manner of their distribution.
The COO letter indicated only potential applications of the Petitioner's research and did not show actual impact on the field. The second letter made only vague, unsupported assertions about the Petitioner's work without identifying specific contributions.
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 COO letter indicated only potential applications of the Petitioner's research and did not show actual impact on the field. The second letter made only vague, unsupported assertions about the Petitioner's work without identifying specific contributions.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
The documents did not describe how the Petitioner played a leading or critical role at the institutions, and the record contained no evidence regarding the reputation of these institutions.
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 documents did not describe how the Petitioner played a leading or critical role at the institutions, and the record contained no evidence regarding the reputation of these institutions.
AAO found that the Petitioner's written work was not shown to be scholarly in nature. Translations of article content and information about intended audience were not provided, and the descriptions of the work characterized it as essays, opinions, and commentary rather than scholarly work.
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 that the Petitioner's written work was not shown to be scholarly in nature. Translations of article content and information about intended audience were not provided, and the descriptions of the work characterized it as essays, opinions, and commentary rather than scholarly work.
AAO found that the Petitioner's nine Internet articles from 2012–2016, judging service as deputy editor-in-chief, publication of eight articles and books with ~159 citations (predominantly by students), a local festival award, and four recommendation letters collectively failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field of journalism and au…
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 nine Internet articles from 2012–2016, judging service as deputy editor-in-chief, publication of eight articles and books with ~159 citations (predominantly by students), a local festival award, and four recommendation letters collectively failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field of journalism and authorship.
AAO found that three of the nine screenshots did not reflect published material about the Petitioner but rather covered his books and a song. The remaining six screenshots were about him, but none were shown to be from professional or major trade publications or other major media. Some screenshots also lacked author attribution.
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 three of the nine screenshots did not reflect published material about the Petitioner but rather covered his books and a song. The remaining six screenshots were about him, but none were shown to be from professional or major trade publications or other major media. Some screenshots also lacked author attribution.
AAO found the record did not support the Director's determination that the Petitioner made original contributions of major significance, as the evidence did not show her work had greatly influenced the overall field.
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 found the record did not support the Director's determination that the Petitioner made original contributions of major significance, as the evidence did not show her work had greatly influenced the overall field.