AAO found the Petitioner failed to corroborate his role on patent teams or the significance of those patents; his business deals did not rise to original contributions of major significance; and letters from colleagues did not identify specific contributions or explain how they influenced the field.
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 +
AAO found the Petitioner failed to corroborate his role on patent teams or the significance of those patents; his business deals did not rise to original contributions of major significance; and letters from colleagues did not identify specific contributions or explain how they influenced the field.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
Even assuming the Petitioner performed a leading or critical role, he failed to document that the organizations have a distinguished reputation. The record did not substantiate claims of government designation or verify the organizations' reputations.
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 +
Even assuming the Petitioner performed a leading or critical role, he failed to document that the organizations have a distinguished reputation. The record did not substantiate claims of government designation or verify the organizations' reputations.
Without an official transcript verifying the duration of the program, AAO could not confirm whether the Bacharel was a 3-year (not equivalent) or 4-5 year (equivalent) degree per EDGE.
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 +
Without an official transcript verifying the duration of the program, AAO could not confirm whether the Bacharel was a 3-year (not equivalent) or 4-5 year (equivalent) degree per EDGE.
AAO explicitly reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the Step 1 threshold, while noting in dicta 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 reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the Step 1 threshold, while noting in dicta that the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
The Petitioner did not challenge the Director's finding on appeal. The supporting letter did not detail his duties or explain the types of articles the journal publishes, and no copy of the publication or official editors list was provided.
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 +
The Petitioner did not challenge the Director's finding on appeal. The supporting letter did not detail his duties or explain the types of articles the journal publishes, and no copy of the publication or official editors list was provided.
Five years post-baccalaureate progressive experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
Even using the earlier completion date of July 8, 2011, the Beneficiary had less than five years before the January 28, 2016 priority date, especially since experience with the Petitioner did not qualify per section J.21 of the labor certification.
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 +
Even using the earlier completion date of July 8, 2011, the Beneficiary had less than five years before the January 28, 2016 priority date, especially since experience with the Petitioner did not qualify per section J.21 of the labor certification.
Beneficiary meets labor certification education and experience requirements
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed the Beneficiary did not meet the labor certification's education requirements and additionally found he did not meet the alternative bachelor's-plus-five-years experience pathway.
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 the Beneficiary did not meet the labor certification's education requirements and additionally found he did not meet the alternative bachelor's-plus-five-years experience pathway.
Request to change classification from EB-2 to EB-3 skilled worker
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the record does not establish a genuine clerical error and that AAO cannot change classifications on appeal after the Director has issued a decision.
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 record does not establish a genuine clerical error and that AAO cannot change classifications on appeal after the Director has issued a decision.
Foreign degree equivalency to U.S. bachelor's degree
证据为何得到认可
AAO credited EDGE as a reliable, peer-reviewed source indicating that an AICTE-recognized PGD following a three-year Indian bachelor's degree equates to a U.S. baccalaureate. Three credential evaluations corroborated this, and the institution was confirmed to be AICTE-recognized, leading AAO to conclude the PGD is a foreign equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's 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 credited EDGE as a reliable, peer-reviewed source indicating that an AICTE-recognized PGD following a three-year Indian bachelor's degree equates to a U.S. baccalaureate. Three credential evaluations corroborated this, and the institution was confirmed to be AICTE-recognized, leading AAO to conclude the PGD is a foreign equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree.