display of the alien's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
证据为何得到认可
The record confirms the petitioner has been a violinist for many years and has displayed her work in musical competitions, concerts, and other artistic performances, satisfying both the display and venue requirements 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 +
The record confirms the petitioner has been a violinist for many years and has displayed her work in musical competitions, concerts, and other artistic performances, satisfying both the display and venue requirements of this criterion.
Schedule A Group II — work in the sciences or arts
证据为何得到认可
AAO held that 'sciences or arts' is defined broadly under 20 C.F.R. § 656.5(b)(1) and the Beneficiary's pharmaceutics-informed financial analyses fall within the regulatory definition.
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 held that 'sciences or arts' is defined broadly under 20 C.F.R. § 656.5(b)(1) and the Beneficiary's pharmaceutics-informed financial analyses fall within the regulatory definition.
AAO found the Director misunderstood basic accounting; the Petitioner had over $6 million in cash and net current assets well above the proffered wage.
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 the Director misunderstood basic accounting; the Petitioner had over $6 million in cash and net current assets well above the proffered wage.
AAO agreed she lacks the required experience for multiple reasons: her current position is admitted to differ from the offered one and is only 28 months; prior employment is undocumented by required employer letters and totaled less than nine years; and she only passed the FINRA exams required for the offered position after joining the Petitioner.
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 she lacks the required experience for multiple reasons: her current position is admitted to differ from the offered one and is only 28 months; prior employment is undocumented by required employer letters and totaled less than nine years; and she only passed the FINRA exams required for the offered position after joining the Petitioner.
AAO concluded the documentation, even though meeting two regulatory criteria, did not corroborate widespread acclaim or international recognition; a single peer review, uncited authorship, patents without evidence of impact, and unspecified conference invitations were insufficient.
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 concluded the documentation, even though meeting two regulatory criteria, did not corroborate widespread acclaim or international recognition; a single peer review, uncited authorship, patents without evidence of impact, and unspecified conference invitations were insufficient.
AAO found that letters crediting the Beneficiary with reducing mortality and readmission rates did not specifically explain how he was responsible, and the state report did not list him as a provider for the Petitioner. The fellowship letters did not specify how the Beneficiary's contributions resulted in measurable success for the organization. Merely repeating statutory language does not satisfy the burden of proof.
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 letters crediting the Beneficiary with reducing mortality and readmission rates did not specifically explain how he was responsible, and the state report did not list him as a provider for the Petitioner. The fellowship letters did not specify how the Beneficiary's contributions resulted in measurable success for the organization. Merely repeating statutory language does not satisfy the burden of proof.
AAO found that the copy of the article submitted does not list an author, a date, or any other evidence of its publication, as required by the regulation.
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 copy of the article submitted does not list an author, a date, or any other evidence of its publication, as required by the regulation.
date of award of foreign equivalent baccalaureate degree
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO held that neither the provisional certificate nor the statement of marks substantiated an earlier degree-award date; they showed only eligibility and exam-passage, not completion of all substantive degree requirements or university approval of the degree before the diploma 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 held that neither the provisional certificate nor the statement of marks substantiated an earlier degree-award date; they showed only eligibility and exam-passage, not completion of all substantive degree requirements or university approval of the degree before the diploma date.