AAO found that in the aggregate the evidence showed early regional success as a child actress in Canada but no sustained national or international acclaim, and that the petitioner's more recent U.S. work produced no critical recognition, failing to establish her as one of the small percentage at the very top of the 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 +
AAO found that in the aggregate the evidence showed early regional success as a child actress in Canada but no sustained national or international acclaim, and that the petitioner's more recent U.S. work produced no critical recognition, failing to establish her as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field.
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that criterion (vii) is limited to visual artists and does not apply to performing artists. Because the petitioner is an actress and not a visual artist who created tangible pieces of art displayed at exhibitions, she 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 +
AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that criterion (vii) is limited to visual artists and does not apply to performing artists. Because the petitioner is an actress and not a visual artist who created tangible pieces of art displayed at exhibitions, she does not qualify.
AAO found that nominations do not qualify under the plain language of the regulation, which specifies only prizes or awards. The single award submitted (2003 Alberta Film and Television Award) lacked sufficient independent evidence to establish it is nationally or internationally recognized; counsel's assertions alone do not constitute 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 +
AAO found that nominations do not qualify under the plain language of the regulation, which specifies only prizes or awards. The single award submitted (2003 Alberta Film and Television Award) lacked sufficient independent evidence to establish it is nationally or internationally recognized; counsel's assertions alone do not constitute evidence.
AAO agreed the one-party contract was not probative evidence of an executed agreement to pay the proposed rate. Many financial documents did not show an hourly wage. Additionally, showing a salary above average is insufficient; the petitioner must show earnings at the very top of the field compared to similarly performing workers.
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 agreed the one-party contract was not probative evidence of an executed agreement to pay the proposed rate. Many financial documents did not show an hourly wage. Additionally, showing a salary above average is insufficient; the petitioner must show earnings at the very top of the field compared to similarly performing workers.
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
Most articles were about events or projects rather than about the petitioner. One article was not even in the record. The remaining articles appeared in publications with insufficient independent evidence of major-media status: one had a locally consistent circulation of 11,317, and information about another relied on an unreliable Wikipedia article and a document of unknown sourcing.…
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 +
Most articles were about events or projects rather than about the petitioner. One article was not even in the record. The remaining articles appeared in publications with insufficient independent evidence of major-media status: one had a locally consistent circulation of 11,317, and information about another relied on an unreliable Wikipedia article and a document of unknown sourcing. Counsel's assertions about The Edmonton Journal's circulation do not constitute evidence.
AAO found that neither the RFE response nor the appeal evidence included box office receipts or record/cassette/compact disk/video sales as required by the regulation. The RFE provided sufficient notice of required evidence, and the petitioner had multiple opportunities to submit it but failed to do so.
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 neither the RFE response nor the appeal evidence included box office receipts or record/cassette/compact disk/video sales as required by the regulation. The RFE provided sufficient notice of required evidence, and the petitioner had multiple opportunities to submit it but failed to do so.
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
The petitioner's own publications belong under criterion (vi); citing articles are about the authors' own work, not the petitioner; news sites linking to the petitioner's work are not published material about the petitioner; topic review articles citing dozens of works are not about the petitioner; and support letters are not publications in major media.
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 publications belong under criterion (vi); citing articles are about the authors' own work, not the petitioner; news sites linking to the petitioner's work are not published material about the petitioner; topic review articles citing dozens of works are not about the petitioner; and support letters are not publications in major media.
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
AAO 为什么未被说服
Letters about the petitioner's role at M.D. Anderson did not sufficiently show his standing in the institutional hierarchy or how his role as a senior researcher within one department was critical to the entire organization. Moreover, the petitioner only submitted documentation of the distinguished reputation of M.D.…
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 about the petitioner's role at M.D. Anderson did not sufficiently show his standing in the institutional hierarchy or how his role as a senior researcher within one department was critical to the entire organization. Moreover, the petitioner only submitted documentation of the distinguished reputation of M.D. Anderson and not of the other organizations, while the regulation requires leading or critical roles for 'organizations' in the plural.
original scientific contributions of major significance in the field
AAO 为什么未被说服
Support letters were largely conclusory, discussed potential future impact rather than already-achieved major significance, and compared the petitioner favorably only among young/early-career scientists rather than the field as a whole.…
为什么值得参考
区分“工作具有原创性”与“原创贡献对整个领域具有重大意义”的证明。
查看完整裁决理由 +
Support letters were largely conclusory, discussed potential future impact rather than already-achieved major significance, and compared the petitioner favorably only among young/early-career scientists rather than the field as a whole. The petitioner had only one moderately cited article, the most significant manuscript had not been published, and there was insufficient evidence that the petitioner's research had already been reproduced, confirmed, or applied by other experts.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
While the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's role was leading for both organizations, the petitioner failed to document the distinguished reputation of either the Korean National Taekwondo Demonstration team or the KCSNY Taekwondo Demonstration team.…
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 +
While the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's role was leading for both organizations, the petitioner failed to document the distinguished reputation of either the Korean National Taekwondo Demonstration team or the KCSNY Taekwondo Demonstration team. Furthermore, even if the Korean National team had a distinguished reputation, the regulation requires leading or critical roles for qualifying organizations in the plural.