The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his citation count is significant or what effect his work had on the field. His books' subject matter was not shown to be widely adopted. Recommendation letters used general praise without specifying how his contributions were of major significance, and his framework was not shown to have been widely adopted.
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 Petitioner did not demonstrate that his citation count is significant or what effect his work had on the field. His books' subject matter was not shown to be widely adopted. Recommendation letters used general praise without specifying how his contributions were of major significance, and his framework was not shown to have been widely adopted.
The university is an academic institution, not an association, and the record does not demonstrate that nationally or internationally recognized experts participated in the hiring process or that outstanding achievements are required. The society document was not fully translated with a certified translation, so AAO could not determine if the appointment requirements satisfy the 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 +
The university is an academic institution, not an association, and the record does not demonstrate that nationally or internationally recognized experts participated in the hiring process or that outstanding achievements are required. The society document was not fully translated with a certified translation, so AAO could not determine if the appointment requirements satisfy the criterion.
Because most articles lacked certified translations, AAO could only consider one article. That publication failed to document its circulation relative to other outlets or otherwise establish it is major media, and the record contained conflicting information about the publication's nature. The evidence did not show the articles were about the Petitioner relating to his work or that they appeared in qualifying 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 +
Because most articles lacked certified translations, AAO could only consider one article. That publication failed to document its circulation relative to other outlets or otherwise establish it is major media, and the record contained conflicting information about the publication's nature. The evidence did not show the articles were about the Petitioner relating to his work or that they appeared in qualifying media.
AAO declined to reach a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold of at least three criteria, but observed in aggregate that the record did not demonstrate 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 reach a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold of at least three criteria, but observed in aggregate that the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's peer review activities as executive editor of a journal in 2014 and 2015 satisfied the judging criterion.
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 peer review activities as executive editor of a journal in 2014 and 2015 satisfied the judging criterion.
Timing of acquisition relative to labor certification filing
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed that neither USCIS nor DOL recognize a successorship formed before the start of the immigration process. USCIS policy requires the transfer of ownership to occur after the filing or approval of the original labor certification; DOL allows pre-filing successorships only when the acquisition occurred after advertising began, which was not the case here.
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 that neither USCIS nor DOL recognize a successorship formed before the start of the immigration process. USCIS policy requires the transfer of ownership to occur after the filing or approval of the original labor certification; DOL allows pre-filing successorships only when the acquisition occurred after advertising began, which was not the case here.
Job opportunity remains the same as certified (location/prevailing wage)
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO acknowledged the position involves relocation but found that the Petitioner's use of the Massachusetts prevailing wage was artificial because it intended to employ the Beneficiary in California, where the prevailing wage was nearly $20,000 higher. This would allow the Petitioner to pay a lower wage than U.S. workers similarly employed near its actual headquarters, contrary to the Act.
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 acknowledged the position involves relocation but found that the Petitioner's use of the Massachusetts prevailing wage was artificial because it intended to employ the Beneficiary in California, where the prevailing wage was nearly $20,000 higher. This would allow the Petitioner to pay a lower wage than U.S. workers similarly employed near its actual headquarters, contrary to the Act.