AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's determination, finding the record as a whole does not establish exceptional ability. The Petitioner failed to show how her qualifications set her apart from other entrepreneurs in agriculture and did not demonstrate impact beyond her clients indicative of significant contributions to 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 adopted and affirmed the Director's determination, finding the record as a whole does not establish exceptional ability. The Petitioner failed to show how her qualifications set her apart from other entrepreneurs in agriculture and did not demonstrate impact beyond her clients indicative of significant contributions to the field.
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the threshold EB-2 exceptional ability classification, making it unnecessary to reach the NIW analysis.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the threshold EB-2 exceptional ability classification, making it unnecessary to reach the NIW analysis.
AAO declined to review the Director's favorable determination for the leading or critical role criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the minimum of three criteria regardless.
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 review the Director's favorable determination for the leading or critical role criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the minimum of three criteria regardless.
AAO declined to reach this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the minimum of three criteria regardless, rendering it unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
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 declined to reach this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the minimum of three criteria regardless, rendering it unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
AAO formally reserved the final merits determination as unnecessary given the Petitioner's failure to meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted in the aggregate the record does not demonstrate the required 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 formally reserved the final merits determination as unnecessary given the Petitioner's failure to meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted in the aggregate the record does not demonstrate the required acclaim.
Minimum education requirement (single-source foreign equivalent of U.S. bachelor's degree)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The academic equivalency evaluation incorrectly concluded the two-year postgraduate diploma alone equals a U.S. bachelor's degree. The AACRAO EDGE source cited by the evaluator actually states the postgraduate diploma is comparable to a U.S. bachelor's degree only when following a three-year bachelor's degree, not as a single-source equivalent. The evaluation is therefore discounted.
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 academic equivalency evaluation incorrectly concluded the two-year postgraduate diploma alone equals a U.S. bachelor's degree. The AACRAO EDGE source cited by the evaluator actually states the postgraduate diploma is comparable to a U.S. bachelor's degree only when following a three-year bachelor's degree, not as a single-source equivalent. The evaluation is therefore discounted.
Five years post-baccalaureate experience (substantially comparable position analysis)
裁决如何说明
AAO flagged that the Director should review whether the Beneficiary's prior experience with the petitioning employer in the advisory senior consultant role was 'substantially comparable' to the advisory manager position under 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(i)(3), and instructed the Director to request additional information if needed on remand.
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 flagged that the Director should review whether the Beneficiary's prior experience with the petitioning employer in the advisory senior consultant role was 'substantially comparable' to the advisory manager position under 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(i)(3), and instructed the Director to request additional information if needed on remand.
AAO found the Director applied the wrong standard ('same exact position' rather than 'same or similar') and that the record shows no material change in the job opportunity requiring a new 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 +
AAO found the Director applied the wrong standard ('same exact position' rather than 'same or similar') and that the record shows no material change in the job opportunity requiring a new labor certification.
AAO reserved consideration of this criterion because the Petitioner failed the awards criterion and could not meet the minimum three criteria regardless of findings on judging.
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 reserved consideration of this criterion because the Petitioner failed the awards criterion and could not meet the minimum three criteria regardless of findings on judging.