The director found and the AAO accepted that the petitioner had participated as a judge of the work of others; this criterion was not disputed on appeal.
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 director found and the AAO accepted that the petitioner had participated as a judge of the work of others; this criterion was not disputed on appeal.
Counsel failed to address the director's findings, including that the job offer letter did not mention the petitioner's name, did not constitute an offer, and was unsigned. No evidence showed the petitioner had commanded a high salary. The claim was deemed abandoned.
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 +
Counsel failed to address the director's findings, including that the job offer letter did not mention the petitioner's name, did not constitute an offer, and was unsigned. No evidence showed the petitioner had commanded a high salary. The claim was deemed abandoned.
Ineffective assistance of counsel (Lozada requirements)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The prior AAO decision found the petitioner failed to satisfy the Lozada requirements for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, and in the current motion the petitioner does not challenge that determination or assert the AAO's prior reliance on Lozada was erroneous.
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 prior AAO decision found the petitioner failed to satisfy the Lozada requirements for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, and in the current motion the petitioner does not challenge that determination or assert the AAO's prior reliance on Lozada was erroneous.
The AAO maintained its fraud finding, noting the petitioner failed to establish she was represented by the attorneys alleged to have committed fraud, and that she personally signed the Form I-140 under penalty of perjury.
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 maintained its fraud finding, noting the petitioner failed to establish she was represented by the attorneys alleged to have committed fraud, and that she personally signed the Form I-140 under penalty of perjury.
beneficiary meets education requirements stated on ETA Form 9089
AAO 为什么未被说服
Without a U.S. bachelor's degree or single foreign equivalent, the beneficiary fails to meet either the primary master's requirement or the alternative bachelor's-plus-five-years requirement on the labor certification.
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 +
Without a U.S. bachelor's degree or single foreign equivalent, the beneficiary fails to meet either the primary master's requirement or the alternative bachelor's-plus-five-years requirement on the labor certification.
AAO concludes that, applying the plain language of the labor certification, the beneficiary's three-year B.Com. plus ICAI credential does not constitute a master's degree or foreign educational equivalent in accounting.
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 concludes that, applying the plain language of the labor certification, the beneficiary's three-year B.Com. plus ICAI credential does not constitute a master's degree or foreign educational equivalent in accounting.
Although co-composing on a national-level film is an accomplishment, the petitioner failed to show that the film's commercial sales could be attributed to him. He was not prominently featured in promotional materials, and only two of many reviews mentioned the music.
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 +
Although co-composing on a national-level film is an accomplishment, the petitioner failed to show that the film's commercial sales could be attributed to him. He was not prominently featured in promotional materials, and only two of many reviews mentioned the music.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that one-time art/theater projects do not qualify as organizations or establishments; for sponsoring organizations like the Polish Theatre, the petitioner failed to show his role was critical; and the petitioner failed to substantiate the distinguished reputation of the various musical groups he participated in.
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 one-time art/theater projects do not qualify as organizations or establishments; for sponsoring organizations like the Polish Theatre, the petitioner failed to show his role was critical; and the petitioner failed to substantiate the distinguished reputation of the various musical groups he participated in.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that most submitted items were not awards or prizes (acceptances/finalist status), and that for the two items that could be prizes, the petitioner submitted only a letter attestation (item 5) or a certificate without documentation of national recognition (item 6).
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 most submitted items were not awards or prizes (acceptances/finalist status), and that for the two items that could be prizes, the petitioner submitted only a letter attestation (item 5) or a certificate without documentation of national recognition (item 6).