The petitioner's own credentialing evidence showed no change in physical therapy educational requirements since 2001, undercutting counsel's evolving-standards argument. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence, and no objective proof reconciled the inconsistency between the two petitions.
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 own credentialing evidence showed no change in physical therapy educational requirements since 2001, undercutting counsel's evolving-standards argument. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence, and no objective proof reconciled the inconsistency between the two petitions.
Beneficiary holds foreign equivalent of U.S. master's degree in Physical Therapy
AAO 为什么未被说服
The beneficiary's own sworn statements on the two ETA Forms 9089 were contradictory—claiming bachelor's level in the first and master's level in the second. The revised credential evaluation offered no explanation for its changed conclusion, contained internal credit-count inconsistencies, and was contradicted by a prior evaluation.…
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 own sworn statements on the two ETA Forms 9089 were contradictory—claiming bachelor's level in the first and master's level in the second. The revised credential evaluation offered no explanation for its changed conclusion, contained internal credit-count inconsistencies, and was contradicted by a prior evaluation. The 'grandfathered' baccalaureate degree argument was rejected as legally insufficient to elevate a bachelor's degree to master's equivalency.
The AAO issued an RFE requesting ability-to-pay evidence for 2010–2012, but the petitioner did not respond, and the RFE notice sent to the petitioner was returned as undeliverable. Failure to respond to an RFE that precludes a material line of inquiry warrants denial under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14).
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 AAO issued an RFE requesting ability-to-pay evidence for 2010–2012, but the petitioner did not respond, and the RFE notice sent to the petitioner was returned as undeliverable. Failure to respond to an RFE that precludes a material line of inquiry warrants denial under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14).
AAO confirmed that the petitioner paid the beneficiary only $75,712.50 in 2011 against a proffered wage of $161,013; had net income of only $16,422; and had negative net current assets of -$426,124. The HR Manager's letter lacked probative value because it was not from a financial officer as required by regulation.…
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 confirmed that the petitioner paid the beneficiary only $75,712.50 in 2011 against a proffered wage of $161,013; had net income of only $16,422; and had negative net current assets of -$426,124. The HR Manager's letter lacked probative value because it was not from a financial officer as required by regulation. The argument to add 'loans to shareholders' to current assets was rejected because that line item is not within Schedule L lines 1–6 defining current assets. Totality of circumstances under Sonegawa also failed.
beneficiary meets education stated on ETA Form 9089
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agrees the beneficiary does not meet the labor certification's stated master's-degree requirement and notes USCIS may not ignore terms on a labor certification or impose alternatives.
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 agrees the beneficiary does not meet the labor certification's stated master's-degree requirement and notes USCIS may not ignore terms on a labor certification or impose alternatives.
The beneficiary's own affidavit was self-serving and insufficient. While documentary evidence established restaurant ownership and investment activity for three years (2007–2010), no tax returns or bank statements were submitted to cover 2005 and 2006, leaving the five-year qualifying experience requirement unmet as of the May 31, 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 beneficiary's own affidavit was self-serving and insufficient. While documentary evidence established restaurant ownership and investment activity for three years (2007–2010), no tax returns or bank statements were submitted to cover 2005 and 2006, leaving the five-year qualifying experience requirement unmet as of the May 31, 2011 priority date.
The petitioner failed to provide the required tax returns for 2011 and 2012 despite multiple requests, and the submitted alternative evidence (Form 941, payroll journal, and owner letter) was insufficient under the regulatory framework. Without documentary evidence of net income or net current assets, and with no evidence the beneficiary was employed and paid by the petitioner, the ability to pay 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 +
The petitioner failed to provide the required tax returns for 2011 and 2012 despite multiple requests, and the submitted alternative evidence (Form 941, payroll journal, and owner letter) was insufficient under the regulatory framework. Without documentary evidence of net income or net current assets, and with no evidence the beneficiary was employed and paid by the petitioner, the ability to pay was not established.
Recognition for achievements/contributions (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
AAO 为什么未被说服
Letters that referenced post-filing events were excluded under Matter of Katigbak, and the remaining letters did not identify recognition of achievement or significant contributions to the industry.
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 +
Letters that referenced post-filing events were excluded under Matter of Katigbak, and the remaining letters did not identify recognition of achievement or significant contributions to the industry.