The criterion was raised for the first time on appeal and could not be raised anew on motion; the AAO's prior finding that this criterion could not be advanced on appeal was not challenged or overcome.
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 criterion was raised for the first time on appeal and could not be raised anew on motion; the AAO's prior finding that this criterion could not be advanced on appeal was not challenged or overcome.
Foreign-language documents submitted in support of this criterion lacked proper English translations and certifications of translation, rendering them without evidentiary value.
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 +
Foreign-language documents submitted in support of this criterion lacked proper English translations and certifications of translation, rendering them without evidentiary value.
high salary or other significantly high remuneration
AAO 为什么未被说服
This criterion was raised for the first time on appeal and therefore could not be raised on motion. Additionally, the evidence submitted showed average salaries for unrelated occupations rather than salaries in relation to others in the petitioner's field.
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 +
This criterion was raised for the first time on appeal and therefore could not be raised on motion. Additionally, the evidence submitted showed average salaries for unrelated occupations rather than salaries in relation to others in the petitioner's field.
continuing ability to pay proffered wage from priority date
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO concluded the petitioner did not establish ability to pay through wages paid to the beneficiary (W-2 deficiencies of $54,638.22 in 2007 and $79,710.40 in 2008), net income, or net current assets, because aggregate wage obligations across multiple simultaneously pending petitions far exceeded the petitioner's resources.
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 concluded the petitioner did not establish ability to pay through wages paid to the beneficiary (W-2 deficiencies of $54,638.22 in 2007 and $79,710.40 in 2008), net income, or net current assets, because aggregate wage obligations across multiple simultaneously pending petitions far exceeded the petitioner's resources.
AAO analyzed wages paid (all below proffered wage), net income (negative or insufficient for every year 2008-2012), and net current assets (negative or insufficient for every year 2008-2012). Under the three-step ability-to-pay analysis, the petitioner failed at each step, and no additional Sonegawa-type evidence was submitted.
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 analyzed wages paid (all below proffered wage), net income (negative or insufficient for every year 2008-2012), and net current assets (negative or insufficient for every year 2008-2012). Under the three-step ability-to-pay analysis, the petitioner failed at each step, and no additional Sonegawa-type evidence was submitted.
serves the national interest to a substantially greater degree than an available U.S. worker
证据为何得到认可
AAO concluded that the substantially expanded citation record on appeal, together with witness testimony, demonstrates widespread reliance on the petitioner's work and establishes influence sufficient to outweigh the labor certification process.
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 concluded that the substantially expanded citation record on appeal, together with witness testimony, demonstrates widespread reliance on the petitioner's work and establishes influence sufficient to outweigh the labor certification process.
beneficiary's qualifying work experience per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found one experience letter non-compliant with 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(l)(3)(ii)(A) and identified unresolved inconsistencies between two ETA 9089s and a Form G-325A regarding the beneficiary's employment history; petitioner must produce independent objective evidence on remand.
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 one experience letter non-compliant with 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(l)(3)(ii)(A) and identified unresolved inconsistencies between two ETA 9089s and a Form G-325A regarding the beneficiary's employment history; petitioner must produce independent objective evidence on remand.