The labor certification specified Bellevue, Washington as the worksite while the petition indicated Pennsylvania, and the petitioner left blank the field for an alternative worksite address, thereby representing that work would occur at the Pennsylvania address. No legal authority permits reliance on a labor certification that does not match the petition.
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 specified Bellevue, Washington as the worksite while the petition indicated Pennsylvania, and the petitioner left blank the field for an alternative worksite address, thereby representing that work would occur at the Pennsylvania address. No legal authority permits reliance on a labor certification that does not match the petition.
The petitioner's 2012 tax return net income and net current assets did not establish ability to pay the combined proffered wages to this beneficiary and all other beneficiaries from the petition's priority date. The W-2 evidence also did not show the proffered wage was actually paid to any beneficiary.
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 2012 tax return net income and net current assets did not establish ability to pay the combined proffered wages to this beneficiary and all other beneficiaries from the petition's priority date. The W-2 evidence also did not show the proffered wage was actually paid to any beneficiary.
The AAO agrees the petitioner has not established a bona fide job offer; the worksite discrepancy is unexplained, requested evidence (contracts, advertisements, DOL correspondence) was not submitted, and the leases/subleases do not establish the nature of business activities at the claimed worksites.
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 agrees the petitioner has not established a bona fide job offer; the worksite discrepancy is unexplained, requested evidence (contracts, advertisements, DOL correspondence) was not submitted, and the leases/subleases do not establish the nature of business activities at the claimed worksites.
AAO agrees: aggregate wage obligation to sponsored workers exceeds the petitioner's net income and net current assets; the petitioner did not adequately identify which of its W-2 recipients were sponsored workers in 2012-2013; and Sonegawa-type factors do not establish 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 +
AAO agrees: aggregate wage obligation to sponsored workers exceeds the petitioner's net income and net current assets; the petitioner did not adequately identify which of its W-2 recipients were sponsored workers in 2012-2013; and Sonegawa-type factors do not establish ability to pay.
serves national interest substantially greater than a U.S. worker with same minimum qualifications
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that a shortage of qualified U.S. workers is not grounds for approving the waiver because the labor certification process exists to address such shortages. The petitioner's evaluations mostly showed 'Meets Expectations' ratings, and she did not demonstrate influence on the field as a whole or a past record of demonstrable achievement.
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that a shortage of qualified U.S. workers is not grounds for approving the waiver because the labor certification process exists to address such shortages. The petitioner's evaluations mostly showed 'Meets Expectations' ratings, and she did not demonstrate influence on the field as a whole or a past record of demonstrable achievement.
AAO acknowledged the petitioner's arguments about intrinsic merit of his occupation but noted they address only this prong and do not satisfy the other prongs.
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 acknowledged the petitioner's arguments about intrinsic merit of his occupation but noted they address only this prong and do not satisfy the other prongs.
serves national interest substantially greater than a U.S. worker with same minimum qualifications
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the petitioner presented no evidence of past achievements influencing his field as a whole, and did not distinguish himself from other qualified IT administrators. The petitioner had not even begun working at the school when the petition was filed, and USCIS cannot approve a petition based on future eligibility under a new set of facts.
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the petitioner presented no evidence of past achievements influencing his field as a whole, and did not distinguish himself from other qualified IT administrators. The petitioner had not even begun working at the school when the petition was filed, and USCIS cannot approve a petition based on future eligibility under a new set of facts.
AAO found the petitioner submitted no evidence that his IT work would have any national effect on future health care workers. The school is small (57 graduates in 2013), and any impact would be heavily diluted. There is no blanket waiver for employees of such organizations.
为什么值得参考
识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣，以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the petitioner submitted no evidence that his IT work would have any national effect on future health care workers. The school is small (57 graduates in 2013), and any impact would be heavily diluted. There is no blanket waiver for employees of such organizations.
While AAO acknowledged teaching has intrinsic merit, it found there is no blanket waiver for teachers, and general claims about the overall importance of teaching cannot suffice to qualify a particular teacher for the national interest waiver.
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 +
While AAO acknowledged teaching has intrinsic merit, it found there is no blanket waiver for teachers, and general claims about the overall importance of teaching cannot suffice to qualify a particular teacher for the national interest waiver.