AAO concurred with the Director that the submitted salary evidence, compared against a 2013 salary guide for China, established that the Petitioner commanded a high salary relative to others in the field.
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 concurred with the Director that the submitted salary evidence, compared against a 2013 salary guide for China, established that the Petitioner commanded a high salary relative to others in the field.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
Recommendation letters did not demonstrate how teaching yoga classes represented a leadership role, nor did the record show where the Petitioner's role fit in the organizational hierarchy. The Petitioner also did not demonstrate that her role was critical, such as by showing she was responsible for the success or standing of the institution.
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 +
Recommendation letters did not demonstrate how teaching yoga classes represented a leadership role, nor did the record show where the Petitioner's role fit in the organizational hierarchy. The Petitioner also did not demonstrate that her role was critical, such as by showing she was responsible for the success or standing of the institution.
Beneficiary qualification for offered position and advanced degree classification
证据为何得到认可
AAO found on appeal that the Beneficiary did possess the required foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree followed by five years of progressive experience, satisfying the labor certification and advanced degree classification requirements.
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 on appeal that the Beneficiary did possess the required foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree followed by five years of progressive experience, satisfying the labor certification and advanced degree classification requirements.
The Petitioner submitted a 2014 annual report for a different corporate entity with a different EIN. Because a corporation is a legally distinct entity, the financial records of a different entity cannot establish the Petitioner's ability to pay.…
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 a 2014 annual report for a different corporate entity with a different EIN. Because a corporation is a legally distinct entity, the financial records of a different entity cannot establish the Petitioner's ability to pay. Additionally, the Petitioner had dozens of other pending I-140 petitions whose combined proffered wages must also be accounted for, but no information about those petitions was in the record.
Overall magnitude of business activities / Sonegawa factors
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner's website printouts were self-promoting and did not establish industry reputation. The claimed $11/hour margin was unsupported because there was no evidence the Beneficiary would work full-time on that contract, and the pay stubs showed only part-time hours. The line of credit cannot be counted as a cash asset.…
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's website printouts were self-promoting and did not establish industry reputation. The claimed $11/hour margin was unsupported because there was no evidence the Beneficiary would work full-time on that contract, and the pay stubs showed only part-time hours. The line of credit cannot be counted as a cash asset. The Petitioner also had at least 18 other I-140 petitions whose proffered wages must also be considered.
For 2014, net income was $70,559 and net current assets were -$320,840, insufficient to cover the $102,315 shortfall. For 2015, net income was $26,094 and net current assets were -$201,395, also insufficient. For 2016, financial data was not available to make an affirmative finding.
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 +
For 2014, net income was $70,559 and net current assets were -$320,840, insufficient to cover the $102,315 shortfall. For 2015, net income was $26,094 and net current assets were -$201,395, also insufficient. For 2016, financial data was not available to make an affirmative finding.
AAO withdrew the Director's findings for 2015 and 2016. The 2015 W-2 reflected wages paid by the Beneficiary's prior employer, not the Petitioner. The 2016 pay stubs showed only $22,346.88 in wages, far below the $102,315 proffered wage. No wages were established for 2014.
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 withdrew the Director's findings for 2015 and 2016. The 2015 W-2 reflected wages paid by the Beneficiary's prior employer, not the Petitioner. The 2016 pay stubs showed only $22,346.88 in wages, far below the $102,315 proffered wage. No wages were established for 2014.
Reading the labor certification as a whole and giving plain meaning to its terms, the position allows for less than a bachelor's degree and five years of experience and therefore does not qualify for EB-2 advanced-degree classification.
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 +
Reading the labor certification as a whole and giving plain meaning to its terms, the position allows for less than a bachelor's degree and five years of experience and therefore does not qualify for EB-2 advanced-degree classification.
Possession of foreign equivalent of U.S. master's degree
AAO 为什么未被说服
AACRAO EDGE indicates that the postgraduate diploma's admission requirement was only a three-year bachelor's degree (equivalent to three years of U.S. university study), so the diploma does not build upon the four-year bachelor's degree. AAO rejected the expert evaluations as conflicting with EDGE data. Because the postgraduate diploma is equivalent only to a U.S.…
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 +
AACRAO EDGE indicates that the postgraduate diploma's admission requirement was only a three-year bachelor's degree (equivalent to three years of U.S. university study), so the diploma does not build upon the four-year bachelor's degree. AAO rejected the expert evaluations as conflicting with EDGE data. Because the postgraduate diploma is equivalent only to a U.S. bachelor's degree, and a master's degree from India is also equivalent only to a U.S. bachelor's degree per EDGE, the Beneficiary does not possess the foreign equivalent of a U.S. master's degree.