The petitioner's 2012 net income was -$69, which does not cover the proffered wage. The petitioner's line of credit is an unenforceable bank commitment and cannot be added to net income. Depreciable non-current assets are not converted to cash in the ordinary course of business.
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 was -$69, which does not cover the proffered wage. The petitioner's line of credit is an unenforceable bank commitment and cannot be added to net income. Depreciable non-current assets are not converted to cash in the ordinary course of business.
The employment verification documents were deficient: one letter failed to specify full-time or part-time status and did not identify its author; two archival certificates failed to describe the beneficiary's duties and did not specify full-time or part-time status. As a result, two full-time years of qualifying work experience were 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 employment verification documents were deficient: one letter failed to specify full-time or part-time status and did not identify its author; two archival certificates failed to describe the beneficiary's duties and did not specify full-time or part-time status. As a result, two full-time years of qualifying work experience were not established.
The beneficiary's current position with the successor has different duties and uses different technologies than the software engineer position certified by DOL, and the successor submitted no documentary evidence that it intends to employ the beneficiary in the offered 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 beneficiary's current position with the successor has different duties and uses different technologies than the software engineer position certified by DOL, and the successor submitted no documentary evidence that it intends to employ the beneficiary in the offered position.
Despite limited corroboration, the preponderance of the evidence established that the petitioner merged into the filing corporation effective December 1, 2012.
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 +
Despite limited corroboration, the preponderance of the evidence established that the petitioner merged into the filing corporation effective December 1, 2012.
The filing entity did not produce the petitioner's 2012 annual report, federal tax return, or audited financial statements as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2), and payroll records cannot substitute for the required documentation.
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 filing entity did not produce the petitioner's 2012 annual report, federal tax return, or audited financial statements as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2), and payroll records cannot substitute for the required documentation.
The AAO found that establishing the national significance of science education does not mean that the work of one teacher produces benefits that are national in scope. The NYSDOT decision itself cautions that the impact of a single schoolteacher in one elementary school would not be national in scope for NIW purposes.
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 establishing the national significance of science education does not mean that the work of one teacher produces benefits that are national in scope. The NYSDOT decision itself cautions that the impact of a single schoolteacher in one elementary school would not be national in scope for NIW purposes.
AAO found the petitioner failed to provide any financial documentation in response to the NOID and failed to address the combined wage obligations for its 40+ other pending I-140 petitions, leaving ability to pay unestablished.
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 the petitioner failed to provide any financial documentation in response to the NOID and failed to address the combined wage obligations for its 40+ other pending I-140 petitions, leaving ability to pay unestablished.
minimum educational requirements of the offered position
AAO 为什么未被说服
Part H.4 of the ETA Form 9089 requires a bachelor's degree; Part H.9 allows a foreign equivalent. Under the plain language, a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent is required, and the beneficiary's three-year Indian degree does not qualify.
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 +
Part H.4 of the ETA Form 9089 requires a bachelor's degree; Part H.9 allows a foreign equivalent. Under the plain language, a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent is required, and the beneficiary's three-year Indian degree does not qualify.
good and sufficient cause to revoke based on bona fides of job offer
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO finds the record does not show the petitioner lacked intent to employ at the relevant times, nor that the beneficiary lacked intent to work for the petitioner when he filed the I-485, so good and sufficient cause to revoke 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 +
AAO finds the record does not show the petitioner lacked intent to employ at the relevant times, nor that the beneficiary lacked intent to work for the petitioner when he filed the I-485, so good and sufficient cause to revoke was not established.