5 years of qualifying post-baccalaureate experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO independently issued a NOID and concludes the supplemented record (including the expert opinion and offer letters lacking duties and dates) still fails to reliably establish the Beneficiary's duties or dates of employment with the two prior employers. The Petitioner's claimed in-house systems administrator employment, even if accepted, lasted only 2 years, too brief to qualify.
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 independently issued a NOID and concludes the supplemented record (including the expert opinion and offer letters lacking duties and dates) still fails to reliably establish the Beneficiary's duties or dates of employment with the two prior employers. The Petitioner's claimed in-house systems administrator employment, even if accepted, lasted only 2 years, too brief to qualify.
bona fide job opportunity open to U.S. workers (alien influence/control)
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO finds the submitted materials non-responsive: they do not document the Petitioner's ownership history or substantiate that the Beneficiary's identification as a managing partner was an error, and the December 7, 2016 letter to Illinois sought only to 'update' rather than correct records. The revocation of the Illinois registration in 2011 does not show the Beneficiary ceased to be a managing partner.
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 finds the submitted materials non-responsive: they do not document the Petitioner's ownership history or substantiate that the Beneficiary's identification as a managing partner was an error, and the December 7, 2016 letter to Illinois sought only to 'update' rather than correct records. The revocation of the Illinois registration in 2011 does not show the Beneficiary ceased to be a managing partner.
AAO concludes the record does not contain sufficient evidence to support a finding of willful misrepresentation of a material fact and reinstates 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 +
AAO concludes the record does not contain sufficient evidence to support a finding of willful misrepresentation of a material fact and reinstates the labor certification.
AAO finds the Director's reliance on Matter of Shah misplaced because the labor certification refers to a 3-year foreign equivalent degree, not a 3-year foreign degree, and such equivalent degrees exist (e.g., certain UK 3-year baccalaureates).
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 finds the Director's reliance on Matter of Shah misplaced because the labor certification refers to a 3-year foreign equivalent degree, not a 3-year foreign degree, and such equivalent degrees exist (e.g., certain UK 3-year baccalaureates).
The AAO found that while the Petitioner's work has substantial merit, she failed to demonstrate that her proposed endeavor has national importance because the record did not show her work offers original innovations or has broader implications beyond her company and its business partners in the petroleum engineering field.
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 +
The AAO found that while the Petitioner's work has substantial merit, she failed to demonstrate that her proposed endeavor has national importance because the record did not show her work offers original innovations or has broader implications beyond her company and its business partners in the petroleum engineering field.
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer and labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO acknowledged that some of the Petitioner's knowledge may exceed minimum job requirements, but found that she had not shown a significant benefit to the United States through her proposed endeavor, had not demonstrated an urgent national interest, had not shown safety innovations benefiting the nation if other qualified workers were available, and that the factors cited do not outweigh the benefits inherent in the la…
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The AAO acknowledged that some of the Petitioner's knowledge may exceed minimum job requirements, but found that she had not shown a significant benefit to the United States through her proposed endeavor, had not demonstrated an urgent national interest, had not shown safety innovations benefiting the nation if other qualified workers were available, and that the factors cited do not outweigh the benefits inherent in the labor certification process.
24 months qualifying experience in marketing management per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
The employer letters failed to provide a specific description of duties performed as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1), offering only vague descriptions. Additionally, the Beneficiary's employment history from 2003–2006 was described inconsistently across multiple petitions and tax documents (W-2s showing tips indicating a server/gaucho role), and the Petitioner did not sufficiently overcome these inconsistencies.
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 employer letters failed to provide a specific description of duties performed as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1), offering only vague descriptions. Additionally, the Beneficiary's employment history from 2003–2006 was described inconsistently across multiple petitions and tax documents (W-2s showing tips indicating a server/gaucho role), and the Petitioner did not sufficiently overcome these inconsistencies.
intent to employ at location stated on labor certification
裁决如何说明
AAO disagreed that the prior NJ employment defeats the petition but found a USCIS site visit raised separate concerns about onsite employment capacity, warranting 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 disagreed that the prior NJ employment defeats the petition but found a USCIS site visit raised separate concerns about onsite employment capacity, warranting remand.
60 months of qualifying experience with required SAP skills
AAO 为什么未被说服
The prior employer letter omits many of the specific SAP technologies and skills listed in the labor certification, and the Beneficiary's experience with the Petitioner in the same role cannot be counted under DOL regulations.
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 prior employer letter omits many of the specific SAP technologies and skills listed in the labor certification, and the Beneficiary's experience with the Petitioner in the same role cannot be counted under DOL regulations.
AAO found the record insufficient to establish ability to pay and rejected the petitioner's argument that the RFE for other-beneficiary information was improper.
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 insufficient to establish ability to pay and rejected the petitioner's argument that the RFE for other-beneficiary information was improper.