Qualifying experience with the petitioner-employer
证据为何得到认可
AAO credited approximately 46 months of qualifying experience with the Petitioner (not 50 as the Director found), noting the record showed no employment from May 2012 to April 2013. The positions were not substantially comparable to the offered position, so the experience counted.
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 approximately 46 months of qualifying experience with the Petitioner (not 50 as the Director found), noting the record showed no employment from May 2012 to April 2013. The positions were not substantially comparable to the offered position, so the experience counted.
Qualifying experience with first non-petitioner U.S. employer (acquired company)
证据为何得到认可
AAO found the record on appeal established the unavailability of a required employer letter (acquisition and mass layoffs) and credited approximately seven months of qualifying experience based on the manager's affidavit.
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 on appeal established the unavailability of a required employer letter (acquisition and mass layoffs) and credited approximately seven months of qualifying experience based on the manager's affidavit.
Considering the totality of the evidence including publications, editorial roles, expert testimony, and inaugural committee selection, AAO found sustained national and international acclaim at the top of 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 +
Considering the totality of the evidence including publications, editorial roles, expert testimony, and inaugural committee selection, AAO found sustained national and international acclaim at the top of the field.
Continuing ability to pay the proffered wage from priority date
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that 2014 net income of $9,227 and net current assets of -$12,862 were insufficient to cover the $67,913.98 wage gap, let alone the additional obligation to a second I-140 beneficiary. The audited financials were rejected because they reflected accrual accounting inconsistent with the Petitioner's cash-basis tax filings and lacked a cash flow statement.…
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 2014 net income of $9,227 and net current assets of -$12,862 were insufficient to cover the $67,913.98 wage gap, let alone the additional obligation to a second I-140 beneficiary. The audited financials were rejected because they reflected accrual accounting inconsistent with the Petitioner's cash-basis tax filings and lacked a cash flow statement. The shareholder's personal assets could not be imputed to the corporation. The Sonegawa totality analysis also weighed against the Petitioner given the lack of evidence of industry reputation or unusual one-time expenditures.
AAO found the totality of evidence showed the Petitioner had risen to the very top of his field and received the necessary national or international 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 found the totality of evidence showed the Petitioner had risen to the very top of his field and received the necessary national or international acclaim.