AAO found that generalized information about business and IT does not address the Petitioner's specific endeavor or its prospective broader impact. Government cybersecurity strategies and STEM field importance do not substitute for showing that this particular startup IT consulting company's endeavor has national or global implications.…
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 +
AAO found that generalized information about business and IT does not address the Petitioner's specific endeavor or its prospective broader impact. Government cybersecurity strategies and STEM field importance do not substitute for showing that this particular startup IT consulting company's endeavor has national or global implications. The business plan's conflict with Form I-140 wage figures further diminished the reliability of all submitted evidence.
AAO found the record contained sufficient evidence of the petitioner's participation as a judge, including listing in the Tokyo Olympics Competition Officials page and a photo ID from the 2014 Asian Championships, and withdrew the director's adverse determination.
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 +
AAO found the record contained sufficient evidence of the petitioner's participation as a judge, including listing in the Tokyo Olympics Competition Officials page and a photo ID from the 2014 Asian Championships, and withdrew the director's adverse determination.
leading or critical role in a distinguished organization
裁决如何说明
AAO reserved this issue because even if the petitioner satisfied criterion viii, he would still fall short of meeting three out of ten criteria, making the determination unnecessary to the outcome.
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 reserved this issue because even if the petitioner satisfied criterion viii, he would still fall short of meeting three out of ten criteria, making the determination unnecessary to the outcome.
intent to continue working in the field in the United States
证据为何得到认可
While the post-filing-date letters from the colleague and magazine were insufficient to establish intent at time of filing, the Petitioner's initial statement adequately detailed his U.S. work plans as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5), including plans to work at a university or institution, continue researching Kyrgyz-Navajo cultural commonalities, and undertake a translation project.
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 post-filing-date letters from the colleague and magazine were insufficient to establish intent at time of filing, the Petitioner's initial statement adequately detailed his U.S. work plans as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5), including plans to work at a university or institution, continue researching Kyrgyz-Navajo cultural commonalities, and undertake a translation project.
final merits determination – sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that citation comparison evidence was untimely submitted on appeal and, even if considered, would not establish the claimed achievement; the translation selection lacked evidence of the selection criteria or the recognition it conferred; the certificate of gratitude was shared by all five translators whose field-top status was not established; and the newspaper interview reflected recognition but not top-of-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 +
AAO found that citation comparison evidence was untimely submitted on appeal and, even if considered, would not establish the claimed achievement; the translation selection lacked evidence of the selection criteria or the recognition it conferred; the certificate of gratitude was shared by all five translators whose field-top status was not established; and the newspaper interview reflected recognition but not top-of-field status. Expert letters were too general and lacked sufficient explanation of research significance.
AAO agreed with the Director that the endeavor lacks national importance. The business plan's projections of six jobs and ~$72,466 net profit were insufficiently supported, and the focus on Petitioner's qualifications/industry was misplaced for prong one.
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 +
AAO agreed with the Director that the endeavor lacks national importance. The business plan's projections of six jobs and ~$72,466 net profit were insufficiently supported, and the focus on Petitioner's qualifications/industry was misplaced for prong one.
The AAO agreed the Petitioner's degree is a bachelor's/undergraduate degree, not a doctorate, and that dentistry customarily requires a doctoral degree, so a combination of education and experience cannot satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2).
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 agreed the Petitioner's degree is a bachelor's/undergraduate degree, not a doctorate, and that dentistry customarily requires a doctoral degree, so a combination of education and experience cannot satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2).