The only qualifying experience listed for the Beneficiary is 16 months as an applications engineer with a prior employer, but the record contains no letter or other corroborating evidence of those job duties or dates of employment.
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 only qualifying experience listed for the Beneficiary is 16 months as an applications engineer with a prior employer, but the record contains no letter or other corroborating evidence of those job duties or dates of employment.
final merits determination – sustained acclaim and top of field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that the Petitioner's two manuscript reviews, six published articles with ~90 total citations, journal impact factor evidence, and recommendation letters did not collectively demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the top of her field. The recommendation letters showed impact on individual researchers but not major significance to the field as a whole.
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 two manuscript reviews, six published articles with ~90 total citations, journal impact factor evidence, and recommendation letters did not collectively demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the top of her field. The recommendation letters showed impact on individual researchers but not major significance to the field as a whole.
AAO agreed with the Director that the record includes several articles in major media about the Petitioner and his co-founding of the company, satisfying the plain language of 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 agreed with the Director that the record includes several articles in major media about the Petitioner and his co-founding of the company, satisfying the plain language of this criterion.
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
Newspaper articles lacked required publication dates, newspaper names, and authors. Internet articles appeared to come from third-party forums rather than original publishers, and the record lacked evidence of circulation or readership. Moreover, the articles were about tournament results generally, not about the Petitioner specifically.
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 +
Newspaper articles lacked required publication dates, newspaper names, and authors. Internet articles appeared to come from third-party forums rather than original publishers, and the record lacked evidence of circulation or readership. Moreover, the articles were about tournament results generally, not about the Petitioner specifically.