advanced degree or equivalent (five years progressive post-baccalaureate experience)
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO affirmed the director's finding. The petitioner's letters from her employer confirmed approximately 5.5 years of special education teaching but did not indicate progressive experience. Furthermore, the petitioner abandoned the issue on appeal by not addressing it.
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 affirmed the director's finding. The petitioner's letters from her employer confirmed approximately 5.5 years of special education teaching but did not indicate progressive experience. Furthermore, the petitioner abandoned the issue on appeal by not addressing it.
The burden is on the petitioner to compare his earnings to the level of compensation ordinarily encountered in his field; he documented only $13,231.20 over two years and offered no comparative data.
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 burden is on the petitioner to compare his earnings to the level of compensation ordinarily encountered in his field; he documented only $13,231.20 over two years and offered no comparative data.
ten years of full-time experience (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B))
AAO 为什么未被说服
The submitted affidavit was not from an employer, employer letters lacked dates or documented only short stints, and the W-2 amounts are inconsistent with full-year employment. Academic experience falls under a different criterion.
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 submitted affidavit was not from an employer, employer letters lacked dates or documented only short stints, and the W-2 amounts are inconsistent with full-year employment. Academic experience falls under a different criterion.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
AAO 为什么未被说服
The scholarship description had no attributed source and did not match the named fund, and the 2014 certificate post-dates filing and was not shown to constitute qualifying recognition.
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 scholarship description had no attributed source and did not match the named fund, and the 2014 certificate post-dates filing and was not shown to constitute qualifying recognition.
advanced degree or baccalaureate plus 5 years progressive experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
Petitioner could not have earned five years of post-baccalaureate experience given that his studies ran until winter 2010, and he did not contest the director's finding on appeal.
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 +
Petitioner could not have earned five years of post-baccalaureate experience given that his studies ran until winter 2010, and he did not contest the director's finding on appeal.
official academic record (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A))
AAO 为什么未被说服
The university did not award the degree until 2014, after the May 28, 2013 filing date, and the petitioner provided no support for his assertion that the university wrongly withheld it earlier. Eligibility must be established at filing.
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 university did not award the degree until 2014, after the May 28, 2013 filing date, and the petitioner provided no support for his assertion that the university wrongly withheld it earlier. Eligibility must be established at filing.
membership in professional associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))
AAO 为什么未被说服
Petitioner did not show the cited entities are professional associations; conferences were product-user gatherings, the developer registration is a resource site, and the online profile is on a business networking site.
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 +
Petitioner did not show the cited entities are professional associations; conferences were product-user gatherings, the developer registration is a resource site, and the online profile is on a business networking site.
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
AAO 为什么未被说服
Neither the journalism organization nor the university research supervisors' association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts; the claimed lifetime membership was also not supported by evidence.
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 +
Neither the journalism organization nor the university research supervisors' association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts; the claimed lifetime membership was also not supported by evidence.