beneficiary holds foreign equivalent of U.S. master's degree in physical therapy
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed with the director's ultimate conclusion but developed substantially expanded reasoning via NOID, addressing FCCPT's coursework-aggregation methodology, EDGE/AACRAO's contrary view of the Philippine bachelor's PT degree, the historical first professional PT degree in the United States, and CAPTE/APTA credit-hour 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 +
AAO agreed with the director's ultimate conclusion but developed substantially expanded reasoning via NOID, addressing FCCPT's coursework-aggregation methodology, EDGE/AACRAO's contrary view of the Philippine bachelor's PT degree, the historical first professional PT degree in the United States, and CAPTE/APTA credit-hour data. AAO concluded FCCPT's substantial-equivalence determination does not establish a single foreign equivalent degree.
AAO found, on de novo review, that the notice of filing was deficient because it was posted only at one location while the labor certification listed multiple 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 +
AAO found, on de novo review, that the notice of filing was deficient because it was posted only at one location while the labor certification listed multiple worksites.
AAO held the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary's Philippine bachelor's degree is the foreign educational equivalent of a U.S. master's degree in physical therapy as required by 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 +
AAO held the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary's Philippine bachelor's degree is the foreign educational equivalent of a U.S. master's degree in physical therapy as required by the ETA Form 9089.
The AAO found that the expert opinion letter was merely a claim about citations rather than documentary evidence of them, that web addresses to a subscription database were not verifiable evidence, and that citation evidence not submitted in response to the RFE could not be raised for the first time on appeal.
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 AAO found that the expert opinion letter was merely a claim about citations rather than documentary evidence of them, that web addresses to a subscription database were not verifiable evidence, and that citation evidence not submitted in response to the RFE could not be raised for the first time on appeal.
national interest substantially greater than a U.S. worker
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO found that the expert opinion letter was from someone with a background in the textile industry with no expertise in contracting management or the petrochemical industry, and thus lacked the requisite corroboration to establish the petitioner's superiority over available U.S. workers.
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 +
The AAO found that the expert opinion letter was from someone with a background in the textile industry with no expertise in contracting management or the petrochemical industry, and thus lacked the requisite corroboration to establish the petitioner's superiority over available U.S. workers.
serves the national interest to a substantially greater degree than an available U.S. worker
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agrees the petitioner has not established a past record of achievement or influence on the field as a whole that would distinguish her from others, and unsupported speculation about future benefits is insufficient.
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 agrees the petitioner has not established a past record of achievement or influence on the field as a whole that would distinguish her from others, and unsupported speculation about future benefits is insufficient.
AAO agrees the petitioner did not show her work would be national in scope, noting she submitted no documentary evidence that her past activities affected the U.S. economy at a national level.
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 agrees the petitioner did not show her work would be national in scope, noting she submitted no documentary evidence that her past activities affected the U.S. economy at a national level.