AAO acknowledged the principle that salary should be judged relative to others in comparable circumstances but found the record lacked occupational wage data or salary survey results for professional engineers that would demonstrate the petitioner's salary was high relative to peers.
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 acknowledged the principle that salary should be judged relative to others in comparable circumstances but found the record lacked occupational wage data or salary survey results for professional engineers that would demonstrate the petitioner's salary was high relative to peers.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that compared to other positions in the agency hierarchy, the petitioner's role as an engineer in a sub-office fell short of a leading role. He also failed to show how his position was critical to the organization overall, and did not demonstrate the organization had a distinguished reputation.
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 compared to other positions in the agency hierarchy, the petitioner's role as an engineer in a sub-office fell short of a leading role. He also failed to show how his position was critical to the organization overall, and did not demonstrate the organization had a distinguished reputation.
Required degree: bachelor's in elementary education
AAO 为什么未被说服
The labor certification explicitly required a degree in elementary education and rejected alternate fields of study (Part H.7 answered 'No'). The Beneficiary's Philippine degree was in family life and child development.…
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 labor certification explicitly required a degree in elementary education and rejected alternate fields of study (Part H.7 answered 'No'). The Beneficiary's Philippine degree was in family life and child development. The NAEYC website information was general and not an evaluation of the Beneficiary's credentials, and the submitted credential evaluation conflicted with an earlier evaluation that found equivalency only to child and family studies.
Required experience: 5 years as first grade elementary school teacher
AAO 为什么未被说服
Experience with the Petitioner could not be used because the labor certification did not accept alternate occupations (Part H.10 answered 'No') and the experience appeared to be in the offered position. Philippine preschool teaching experience did not qualify because the labor certification required experience in the offered position of first grade teacher, not preschool.…
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 +
Experience with the Petitioner could not be used because the labor certification did not accept alternate occupations (Part H.10 answered 'No') and the experience appeared to be in the offered position. Philippine preschool teaching experience did not qualify because the labor certification required experience in the offered position of first grade teacher, not preschool. Only approximately 1 year and 9 months of qualifying first-grade experience was established through a letter from a second employer.
The Beneficiary's W-2 for 2013 exceeded the proffered wage but her W-2s for 2014 ($49,565.12) and 2015 ($45,289.60) fell below the proffered wage of $51,380, so wages paid do not establish continuing 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 Beneficiary's W-2 for 2013 exceeded the proffered wage but her W-2s for 2014 ($49,565.12) and 2015 ($45,289.60) fell below the proffered wage of $51,380, so wages paid do not establish continuing ability to pay.
Ability to pay via totality of circumstances (Sonegawa)
AAO 为什么未被说服
While the Petitioner has operated since 1972, the record showed persistent negative net revenues and net current assets over multiple years, a state registration showing it is not in good standing, and a 2016 statement from the business manager acknowledging a 'budget shortage.' These circumstances do not parallel the temporary unusual difficulties in Sonegawa.
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 +
While the Petitioner has operated since 1972, the record showed persistent negative net revenues and net current assets over multiple years, a state registration showing it is not in good standing, and a 2016 statement from the business manager acknowledging a 'budget shortage.' These circumstances do not parallel the temporary unusual difficulties in Sonegawa.
The audited financial statement for 2013 (year ending June 30, 2014) showed net current assets of -$456,881, and no financial statement was submitted for the year ending June 30, 2015.
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 audited financial statement for 2013 (year ending June 30, 2014) showed net current assets of -$456,881, and no financial statement was submitted for the year ending June 30, 2015.
The Petitioner's Form 990 for 2013 (covering July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014) reflected -$224,626 in net revenue, and the Petitioner failed to submit returns covering the second half of 2014 or any of 2015.
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 Form 990 for 2013 (covering July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014) reflected -$224,626 in net revenue, and the Petitioner failed to submit returns covering the second half of 2014 or any of 2015.
The Petitioner's 'Recognition Award' from a non-profit charitable organization in Florida was not established as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence in the field. The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the awards criterion did not readily apply to jewelry designers, nor that her evidence was comparable to nationally or internationally recognized awards.
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 'Recognition Award' from a non-profit charitable organization in Florida was not established as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence in the field. The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the awards criterion did not readily apply to jewelry designers, nor that her evidence was comparable to nationally or internationally recognized awards.
The recommendation letters did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The Petitioner's reliance on potential future contractual relationships was improper since eligibility must be demonstrated at the time of filing, and prior contractual relationships were not shown to have impacted or influenced the field significantly.
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 +
The recommendation letters did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The Petitioner's reliance on potential future contractual relationships was improper since eligibility must be demonstrated at the time of filing, and prior contractual relationships were not shown to have impacted or influenced the field significantly.