AAO agreed with the director that the FCCPT 'substantial equivalence' evaluation, which aggregates coursework beyond the single degree, does not establish that the beneficiary's degree itself is a foreign equivalent of a U.S. master's; EDGE confirms the Philippine PT bachelor's is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor'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 agreed with the director that the FCCPT 'substantial equivalence' evaluation, which aggregates coursework beyond the single degree, does not establish that the beneficiary's degree itself is a foreign equivalent of a U.S. master's; EDGE confirms the Philippine PT bachelor's is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's.
Beneficiary meets minimum requirements of offered position per ETA Form 9089
AAO 为什么未被说服
Because the beneficiary's Philippine bachelor's degree is the foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate and not a master's degree, and because the petitioner did not claim the alternate five years of post-baccalaureate experience, the beneficiary does not meet the stated minimum requirements of the position on the ETA Form 9089.
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 +
Because the beneficiary's Philippine bachelor's degree is the foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate and not a master's degree, and because the petitioner did not claim the alternate five years of post-baccalaureate experience, the beneficiary does not meet the stated minimum requirements of the position on the ETA Form 9089.
The petitioner's 2012 net income (IRS Form 1120, Line 28) was -$5,437, which is insufficient to pay the $78,582 proffered wage. USCIS properly relies on net income rather than gross receipts or gross profits, and the event production costs represent business expenses not available to pay wages.
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 net income (IRS Form 1120, Line 28) was -$5,437, which is insufficient to pay the $78,582 proffered wage. USCIS properly relies on net income rather than gross receipts or gross profits, and the event production costs represent business expenses not available to pay wages.
Beneficiary possessed required qualifications as of priority date
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO raised this ground independently. The beneficiary was not listed as a licensee on the California Architects Board website, and state law requires licensure to practice architecture. Without evidence of a license, the beneficiary has not been shown to be qualified for the proffered position.
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 raised this ground independently. The beneficiary was not listed as a licensee on the California Architects Board website, and state law requires licensure to practice architecture. Without evidence of a license, the beneficiary has not been shown to be qualified for the proffered position.
Net current assets sufficient to cover proffered wage
AAO 为什么未被说服
Net current assets of $15,000 were insufficient. Even adding the claimed $46,745 in outside services, the combined total of $61,745 falls short of the $78,582 proffered wage. The record also did not establish that outside services funds would have been available to pay the 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 +
Net current assets of $15,000 were insufficient. Even adding the claimed $46,745 in outside services, the combined total of $61,745 falls short of the $78,582 proffered wage. The record also did not establish that outside services funds would have been available to pay the beneficiary.
Wages paid to beneficiary equal to or exceeding proffered wage
AAO 为什么未被说服
The record contained no IRS W-2 or Form 1099 issued to the beneficiary by the petitioner, so prima facie proof of ability to pay via wages paid was not established.
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 record contained no IRS W-2 or Form 1099 issued to the beneficiary by the petitioner, so prima facie proof of ability to pay via wages paid was not established.
Owner's personal resources to supplement corporate ability to pay
AAO 为什么未被说服
USCIS cannot pierce the corporate veil to consider a corporation owner's personal assets. A corporation is a separate and distinct legal entity from its owners, and no documentary evidence of the owner's resources was submitted in any case.
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 +
USCIS cannot pierce the corporate veil to consider a corporation owner's personal assets. A corporation is a separate and distinct legal entity from its owners, and no documentary evidence of the owner's resources was submitted in any case.
The director found that the proposed benefit from employment in the petitioner's occupation is national in scope, and AAO did not disturb this finding.
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 +
The director found that the proposed benefit from employment in the petitioner's occupation is national in scope, and AAO did not disturb this finding.