The AAO withdrew the director's finding. The petitioner failed to submit primary evidence of salary (payroll records, paystubs, tax documents) and the letters from her own company and father were not sworn affidavits. The comparative salary data did not properly compare her salary to others in her specific field, and foreign-language documents lacked certified translations.
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 withdrew the director's finding. The petitioner failed to submit primary evidence of salary (payroll records, paystubs, tax documents) and the letters from her own company and father were not sworn affidavits. The comparative salary data did not properly compare her salary to others in her specific field, and foreign-language documents lacked certified translations.
The regulation requires documentation of the alien's own receipt of prizes or awards. Documents addressed to the petitioner's father or his companies do not demonstrate the petitioner's individual receipt of such awards. One letter post-dated the petition filing and could not be considered; moreover, it was only a letter of thanks, not a prize or award.
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 regulation requires documentation of the alien's own receipt of prizes or awards. Documents addressed to the petitioner's father or his companies do not demonstrate the petitioner's individual receipt of such awards. One letter post-dated the petition filing and could not be considered; moreover, it was only a letter of thanks, not a prize or award.
The AS system was only applied at the petitioner's own company, and a referenced expert letter speculated about future impact rather than demonstrating current major significance. NTFIS was also shown to be used only within the petitioner's company. The book was not shown to have been widely applied or implemented in the field beyond the petitioner's company.
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 +
The AS system was only applied at the petitioner's own company, and a referenced expert letter speculated about future impact rather than demonstrating current major significance. NTFIS was also shown to be used only within the petitioner's company. The book was not shown to have been widely applied or implemented in the field beyond the petitioner's company.
For TCA, INTES, and a third association, only company memberships were demonstrated, not individual memberships. For TUSIAD, while the petitioner showed individual membership, she failed to demonstrate that TUSIAD requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. Additionally, demonstrating membership in only one association is insufficient given the regulatory use of the plural.
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 +
For TCA, INTES, and a third association, only company memberships were demonstrated, not individual memberships. For TUSIAD, while the petitioner showed individual membership, she failed to demonstrate that TUSIAD requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. Additionally, demonstrating membership in only one association is insufficient given the regulatory use of the plural.
The regulation requires formal participation as a judge either on a panel or individually. Simply signing contracts on behalf of the petitioner's company does not demonstrate formal judging. No documentation was actually submitted for the last project referenced by counsel.
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 regulation requires formal participation as a judge either on a panel or individually. Simply signing contracts on behalf of the petitioner's company does not demonstrate formal judging. No documentation was actually submitted for the last project referenced by counsel.
AAO found that the petitioner's 2011 tax return and paycheck statements established the petitioner's ability to pay the difference between wages actually paid and the full proffered wage of $78,603.00, satisfying the continuing ability-to-pay requirement since the priority date of March 21, 2011.
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 the petitioner's 2011 tax return and paycheck statements established the petitioner's ability to pay the difference between wages actually paid and the full proffered wage of $78,603.00, satisfying the continuing ability-to-pay requirement since the priority date of March 21, 2011.
Beneficiary's foreign education equivalent to U.S. master's degree as required by labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the evaluations unpersuasive and conflicting, noted none were peer-reviewed, and gave preference to AACRAO's EDGE database, which equates an Indian three-year B.Sc. to two-to-three years of U.S. university study and an Indian M.Sc. to a U.S. bachelor's.
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 the evaluations unpersuasive and conflicting, noted none were peer-reviewed, and gave preference to AACRAO's EDGE database, which equates an Indian three-year B.Sc. to two-to-three years of U.S. university study and an Indian M.Sc. to a U.S. bachelor's.
Five years of experience in architectural field per labor certification
证据为何得到认可
The AAO concluded that the beneficiary's master's degree in architecture and five years of work experience in jobs related to architecture satisfied the ETA Form 9089 requirements when Parts H.4 and H.10 are read in combination.
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 concluded that the beneficiary's master's degree in architecture and five years of work experience in jobs related to architecture satisfied the ETA Form 9089 requirements when Parts H.4 and H.10 are read in combination.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
证据为何得到认可
The AAO found that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence demonstrating receipt of two lesser nationally recognized prizes for excellence, minimally meeting the plain language of the 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 +
The AAO found that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence demonstrating receipt of two lesser nationally recognized prizes for excellence, minimally meeting the plain language of the regulation.
The AAO reviewed the record and found sufficient documentary evidence to minimally meet the plain language of the regulation, concurring with the director.
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 AAO reviewed the record and found sufficient documentary evidence to minimally meet the plain language of the regulation, concurring with the director.