The petitioner did not challenge the AAO's prior final merits findings or provide new evidence demonstrating top-of-field status or sustained national or international acclaim.
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 challenge the AAO's prior final merits findings or provide new evidence demonstrating top-of-field status or sustained national or international acclaim.
The petitioner's only tax return was for 2010, predating the priority date. The W-2 submitted was from a different employer entity with a different EIN. The petitioner did not establish it was part of the same consolidated corporate group as the related company.…
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 only tax return was for 2010, predating the priority date. The W-2 submitted was from a different employer entity with a different EIN. The petitioner did not establish it was part of the same consolidated corporate group as the related company. Unaudited financial statements submitted on appeal do not satisfy the regulatory requirement for audited financial statements, and in any event those statements showed a net loss.
beneficiary meets minimum education stated on ETA Form 9089
裁决如何说明
AAO does not reach the merits of whether the beneficiary meets the ETA Form 9089 requirements; it withdraws the revocation for procedural reasons and remands.
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 does not reach the merits of whether the beneficiary meets the ETA Form 9089 requirements; it withdraws the revocation for procedural reasons and remands.
advanced degree or foreign equivalent under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2)
裁决如何说明
AAO flags the advanced-degree qualification as an unresolved issue and remands for the director to evaluate it in the first instance and, if adverse, issue a new NOIR.
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 flags the advanced-degree qualification as an unresolved issue and remands for the director to evaluate it in the first instance and, if adverse, issue a new NOIR.
The petitioner failed to submit federal income tax returns for 2011 or 2012. On appeal, it claimed extensions were filed but provided no copies, and the AAO received no tax returns as of the decision date.
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 failed to submit federal income tax returns for 2011 or 2012. On appeal, it claimed extensions were filed but provided no copies, and the AAO received no tax returns as of the decision date.
Totality of business circumstances (Sonegawa factors)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The record lacked any evidence of established business growth, industry reputation, uncharacteristic losses, or whether the beneficiary was replacing a prior employee or outsourced service. The petitioner also had multiple co-sponsored I-140 beneficiaries, further undermining 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 +
The record lacked any evidence of established business growth, industry reputation, uncharacteristic losses, or whether the beneficiary was replacing a prior employee or outsourced service. The petitioner also had multiple co-sponsored I-140 beneficiaries, further undermining ability to pay.
Wages paid to beneficiary equal to or exceeding proffered wage
AAO 为什么未被说服
The petitioner did not establish that it paid the beneficiary the full proffered wage during any relevant timeframe including from the 2011 priority date.
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 establish that it paid the beneficiary the full proffered wage during any relevant timeframe including from the 2011 priority date.
Evidence submitted in support of this criterion consisted of foreign-language documents without proper translation and letters that did not constitute new evidence.
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 +
Evidence submitted in support of this criterion consisted of foreign-language documents without proper translation and letters that did not constitute new evidence.