AAO withdrew the director's finding. The submitted letter referenced business revenue rather than the petitioner's personal salary, no primary salary evidence (paystubs or tax returns) was submitted, the revenue figure was not isolated from employee contributions, and the wage comparison data was limited to a single metropolitan area rather than providing a proper field-wide comparison.
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 withdrew the director's finding. The submitted letter referenced business revenue rather than the petitioner's personal salary, no primary salary evidence (paystubs or tax returns) was submitted, the revenue figure was not isolated from employee contributions, and the wage comparison data was limited to a single metropolitan area rather than providing a proper field-wide comparison.
Most evidence was in uncertified translations lacking probative value. The remaining evidence showed contributions only to limited specific engagements and municipalities, not to the field as a whole. Reference letters crediting an 'audit methodology' lacked objective corroboration of originality and major significance at the field level.…
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 +
Most evidence was in uncertified translations lacking probative value. The remaining evidence showed contributions only to limited specific engagements and municipalities, not to the field as a whole. Reference letters crediting an 'audit methodology' lacked objective corroboration of originality and major significance at the field level. Additionally, the plural language of the criterion requires more than one original contribution.
AAO withdraws certain specific criticisms from its prior decision (regarding grade inconsistencies and the [REDACTED]/[REDACTED] credit conflict) but reaffirms the bottom-line conclusion. The evaluators' apportionment effectively treats only the second year of the Indian master's as equivalent to a U.S. master's, without showing it was an accelerated program, and they fail to reconcile Indian classroom hours with the U.S.…
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 withdraws certain specific criticisms from its prior decision (regarding grade inconsistencies and the [REDACTED]/[REDACTED] credit conflict) but reaffirms the bottom-line conclusion. The evaluators' apportionment effectively treats only the second year of the Indian master's as equivalent to a U.S. master's, without showing it was an accelerated program, and they fail to reconcile Indian classroom hours with the U.S. credit system's two-hours-of-study-per-classroom-hour assumption.
Although most evidence consisted of uncertified translations, a letter from one reference provided details of audits conducted by the petitioner, which sufficed to meet the plain language of the criterion.
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 +
Although most evidence consisted of uncertified translations, a letter from one reference provided details of audits conducted by the petitioner, which sufficed to meet the plain language of the criterion.
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the petitioner failed at step 1, but noted in dicta that the aggregate evidence does not demonstrate the required level of expertise.
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 conduct a formal final merits determination because the petitioner failed at step 1, but noted in dicta that the aggregate evidence does not demonstrate the required level of expertise.
ability to pay proffered wage (including combined proffered wages for all sponsored workers)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO found that conflicting Quarterly Wage Reports (the petitioner's own submissions contradicted each other and the subpoenaed EDD records) undermined all W-2 evidence of wages actually paid. The petitioner also failed to submit certified tax returns and failed to demonstrate ability to pay the combined proffered wages of its other sponsored workers.
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 AAO found that conflicting Quarterly Wage Reports (the petitioner's own submissions contradicted each other and the subpoenaed EDD records) undermined all W-2 evidence of wages actually paid. The petitioner also failed to submit certified tax returns and failed to demonstrate ability to pay the combined proffered wages of its other sponsored workers.
foreign equivalent of U.S. bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
The beneficiary's overlapping educational and employment periods cast doubt on two experience letters, and the remaining two letters showed only 34 months of qualifying experience, far short of the 60 months required by 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 +
The beneficiary's overlapping educational and employment periods cast doubt on two experience letters, and the remaining two letters showed only 34 months of qualifying experience, far short of the 60 months required by the labor certification.
continuing ability to pay proffered wages of all sponsored workers
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO independently analyzed the wage data and arrived at different totals than the director regarding 2011 proffered wages and wages paid, but still found a wage shortfall. AAO further found that the record lacked 2012 W-2s or Forms 941 to support claimed wages, that counsel's assertions regarding 2012 wages conflicted with the 2012 tax return, and that the petitioner's tax returns showed insufficient net income and net curr…
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 analyzed the wage data and arrived at different totals than the director regarding 2011 proffered wages and wages paid, but still found a wage shortfall. AAO further found that the record lacked 2012 W-2s or Forms 941 to support claimed wages, that counsel's assertions regarding 2012 wages conflicted with the 2012 tax return, and that the petitioner's tax returns showed insufficient net income and net current assets for 2011 and 2012.
AAO determined the company had voluntarily dissolved, the DOC letters were fraudulent, and the county contract letters were inconsistent with public records. No bona fide job offer therefore remains.
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 determined the company had voluntarily dissolved, the DOC letters were fraudulent, and the county contract letters were inconsistent with public records. No bona fide job offer therefore remains.
AAO withdrew the director's favorable finding because the petitioner did not show the national swim team membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts, and in any event the membership was in competitive swimming, not in the field of coaching for which classification is sought.
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 withdrew the director's favorable finding because the petitioner did not show the national swim team membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts, and in any event the membership was in competitive swimming, not in the field of coaching for which classification is sought.