AAO found that the Petitioner's evidence did not demonstrate that her endeavor extends beyond her own business and future clients to impact the broader field, other industries, or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. The new articles submitted on motion were general and did not address the specifics of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.…
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that the Petitioner's evidence did not demonstrate that her endeavor extends beyond her own business and future clients to impact the broader field, other industries, or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. The new articles submitted on motion were general and did not address the specifics of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. The concept of 'national initiative' does not appear in Dhanasar, and the Petitioner's arguments regarding standard of proof were conclusory.
AAO held that while the articles may show the general importance of consulting services, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his specific endeavor meets the national importance element of the first Dhanasar prong.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO held that while the articles may show the general importance of consulting services, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his specific endeavor meets the national importance element of the first Dhanasar prong.
Without a properly translated academic record, his education cannot support the claim. He has not completed his doctorate (pursued since 2016) yet seeks a postdoctoral position, has no evidence of interest from the University of South Carolina or other institutions, and no evidence of research funding or progress.
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 +
Without a properly translated academic record, his education cannot support the claim. He has not completed his doctorate (pursued since 2016) yet seeks a postdoctoral position, has no evidence of interest from the University of South Carolina or other institutions, and no evidence of research funding or progress.
The translator certification did not affirm competence to translate from the foreign language into English, so the foreign-degree evidence does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3).
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 translator certification did not affirm competence to translate from the foreign language into English, so the foreign-degree evidence does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3).
member of professions holding an advanced degree or equivalent
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO disagrees with the Director, finding the Petitioner's first foreign bachelor's required only three-and-a-half years and is not equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's, and that her second bachelor's was too recent to provide the required five years of post-degree progressive experience by the petition filing date.
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 disagrees with the Director, finding the Petitioner's first foreign bachelor's required only three-and-a-half years and is not equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's, and that her second bachelor's was too recent to provide the required five years of post-degree progressive experience by the petition filing date.
bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO finds the experience letters lack required specificity, that colleague letters do not substitute for employer letters, and that inconsistencies further undermine the evidence. No new facts on motion overcome these defects.
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 finds the experience letters lack required specificity, that colleague letters do not substitute for employer letters, and that inconsistencies further undermine the evidence. No new facts on motion overcome these defects.
The submitted articles describe the legal industry, foreign investment, and Brazilian markets at a generalized level without tying any U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically to the Petitioner's endeavor. Her business plan lacks independent corroboration of staffing or financial projections.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The submitted articles describe the legal industry, foreign investment, and Brazilian markets at a generalized level without tying any U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically to the Petitioner's endeavor. Her business plan lacks independent corroboration of staffing or financial projections.
AAO explicitly declined to reach the second Dhanasar prong, reserving it as unnecessary to the outcome given the dispositive finding on the first prong.
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 explicitly declined to reach the second Dhanasar prong, reserving it as unnecessary to the outcome given the dispositive finding on the first prong.