The petition was not filed at the designated lockbox facility until May 11, 2016, two days after the labor certification's May 9 expiration. The Petitioner's assertion that service center filing was proper in May 2016 was unsupported by documentary evidence, and USCIS records showed the lockbox requirement had been in place since August 2010.…
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 petition was not filed at the designated lockbox facility until May 11, 2016, two days after the labor certification's May 9 expiration. The Petitioner's assertion that service center filing was proper in May 2016 was unsupported by documentary evidence, and USCIS records showed the lockbox requirement had been in place since August 2010. Neither the service center's failure to reject the submission nor the absence of a notice of intent to deny altered the outcome.
The Petitioner submitted only 2014 tax returns but no evidence for 2015 or 2016. The Petitioner also had at least 12 other pending or approved petitions, requiring it to demonstrate ability to pay the combined proffered wages of all beneficiaries from the priority 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 +
The Petitioner submitted only 2014 tax returns but no evidence for 2015 or 2016. The Petitioner also had at least 12 other pending or approved petitions, requiring it to demonstrate ability to pay the combined proffered wages of all beneficiaries from the priority date.
Beneficiary meets minimum educational requirements of labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
USCIS must apply the plain language of the labor certification as completed by the employer. Box H.9 expressly states that a foreign educational equivalent is not acceptable, so the Beneficiary's Philippine degree cannot satisfy the U.S. bachelor's degree requirement regardless of its equivalency.
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 +
USCIS must apply the plain language of the labor certification as completed by the employer. Box H.9 expressly states that a foreign educational equivalent is not acceptable, so the Beneficiary's Philippine degree cannot satisfy the U.S. bachelor's degree requirement regardless of its equivalency.
AAO explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the step-1 threshold of at least three criteria. AAO noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
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 explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the step-1 threshold of at least three criteria. AAO noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
The record contains evidence of the Petitioner performing at dance festivals, such as a festival in India, and AAO agreed with the Director's finding that this criterion was satisfied.
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 contains evidence of the Petitioner performing at dance festivals, such as a festival in India, and AAO agreed with the Director's finding that this criterion was satisfied.
Ability to pay combined proffered wages of all I-140 beneficiaries
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner accounted for only 30 of over 100 I-140 petitions it had filed, leaving more than 70 unaddressed. Given the large proffered wages on the known petitions, the omitted petitions could result in a total wage deficiency exceeding the Petitioner's net income. Bank statements are not among the three prescribed evidence types under 8 C.F.R.…
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 accounted for only 30 of over 100 I-140 petitions it had filed, leaving more than 70 unaddressed. Given the large proffered wages on the known petitions, the omitted petitions could result in a total wage deficiency exceeding the Petitioner's net income. Bank statements are not among the three prescribed evidence types under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2), and the totality-of-circumstances argument failed for lack of documented reputation or consistent growth.
AAO found that the Petitioner's net income in each relevant year was sufficient to cover the difference between the proffered wage and wages actually paid to the Beneficiary, thus establishing ability to pay this individual Beneficiary.
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 net income in each relevant year was sufficient to cover the difference between the proffered wage and wages actually paid to the Beneficiary, thus establishing ability to pay this individual Beneficiary.
AAO agreed that the associate membership certificate is not a degree, noting that the issuing institution is not a degree-granting academic institution and that neither the transcript nor the certificate itself claims to be a degree.
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 the associate membership certificate is not a degree, noting that the issuing institution is not a degree-granting academic institution and that neither the transcript nor the certificate itself claims to be a degree.
AAO declined to reach this criterion because the Petitioner had already met three other criteria, making further analysis unnecessary. AAO noted the published material is better considered under the final merits analysis.
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 this criterion because the Petitioner had already met three other criteria, making further analysis unnecessary. AAO noted the published material is better considered under the final merits analysis.