AAO found that one article served as a cover story about the petitioner relating to her work, and another article in a publication with sufficient weekly circulation qualified as major media. Together these satisfied the criterion.
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 one article served as a cover story about the petitioner relating to her work, and another article in a publication with sufficient weekly circulation qualified as major media. Together these satisfied the criterion.
AAO found that BLS statistics excluded self-employed workers like the petitioner, making them unrepresentative of the modeling industry. Median/average statistics and one company's report of its highest-earning models were insufficient comparators. Tax returns lacked corroborating W-2s or 1099s.…
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 BLS statistics excluded self-employed workers like the petitioner, making them unrepresentative of the modeling industry. Median/average statistics and one company's report of its highest-earning models were insufficient comparators. Tax returns lacked corroborating W-2s or 1099s. The petitioner did not compare her income to nationally or internationally acclaimed supermodels and others in high demand during the same time period.
The record includes three pieces of supporting evidence showing the petitioner's participation as a judge in martial arts competitions or events, which satisfies this criterion.
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 +
The record includes three pieces of supporting evidence showing the petitioner's participation as a judge in martial arts competitions or events, which satisfies this criterion.
The petitioner did not contest the director's finding on appeal; AAO affirmed that articles citing the petitioner's work are not 'about' the petitioner.
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 did not contest the director's finding on appeal; AAO affirmed that articles citing the petitioner's work are not 'about' the petitioner.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
Although the petitioner showed a leading role at one employer, the regulation's use of the plural 'organizations or establishments' requires evidence of a leading or critical role for more than one.…
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 +
Although the petitioner showed a leading role at one employer, the regulation's use of the plural 'organizations or establishments' requires evidence of a leading or critical role for more than one. Her role as a reporter at a newspaper was not shown to be leading or critical because she was one of an unspecified number of reporters with similar duties, and she did not distinguish herself from other reporters within the organization's hierarchy.
The website evidence did not show the petitioner—rather than another entrant—won the 2012 award. The 2011 result was a third-place finish. The petitioner failed to submit objective documentary evidence (such as the prize money check) corroborating her receipt of the awards, and the letters asserting national/international recognition were conclusory and self-promotional.
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 website evidence did not show the petitioner—rather than another entrant—won the 2012 award. The 2011 result was a third-place finish. The petitioner failed to submit objective documentary evidence (such as the prize money check) corroborating her receipt of the awards, and the letters asserting national/international recognition were conclusory and self-promotional.
Despite the director finding this criterion met, AAO found the petitioner did not submit documentary evidence of actual earnings (no payroll records or W-2), and the wage comparisons submitted (general editor/copy editor data) did not match the petitioner's more complex job duties as Head of News and Features and Text Feed Editor, making them an inappropriate comparison class.
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 the director finding this criterion met, AAO found the petitioner did not submit documentary evidence of actual earnings (no payroll records or W-2), and the wage comparisons submitted (general editor/copy editor data) did not match the petitioner's more complex job duties as Head of News and Features and Text Feed Editor, making them an inappropriate comparison class.