at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation
裁决如何说明
AAO reserved consideration of this criterion because the petitioner had already failed to meet criterion (A), making it unnecessary to reach criterion (B) to determine that he could not satisfy the three-criteria minimum.
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 reserved consideration of this criterion because the petitioner had already failed to meet criterion (A), making it unnecessary to reach criterion (B) to determine that he could not satisfy the three-criteria minimum.
AAO did not reach this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first Dhanasar prong, making it unnecessary to address the remaining prongs.
为什么值得参考
识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣，以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO did not reach this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first Dhanasar prong, making it unnecessary to address the remaining prongs.
salary or other remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO found the record lacked industry reports, comparisons to similar executives, or other probative evidence to support that the Petitioner commands a salary demonstrating exceptional ability.
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 the record lacked industry reports, comparisons to similar executives, or other probative evidence to support that the Petitioner commands a salary demonstrating exceptional ability.
The AAO agreed that the Petitioner had not demonstrated that the associations relate to his job as chief executive, nor had he shown that these associations require a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent as minimum entry into the occupation.
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 agreed that the Petitioner had not demonstrated that the associations relate to his job as chief executive, nor had he shown that these associations require a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent as minimum entry into the occupation.
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's national importance analysis, finding the Director correctly identified evidentiary deficiencies and that the Petitioner failed to overcome those findings on appeal. New evidence submitted on appeal was not considered because the Petitioner had been given prior notice and opportunity to submit it in response to the RFE.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's national importance analysis, finding the Director correctly identified evidentiary deficiencies and that the Petitioner failed to overcome those findings on appeal. New evidence submitted on appeal was not considered because the Petitioner had been given prior notice and opportunity to submit it in response to the RFE.
AAO found that although the Petitioner's field of power grid research is broadly important, the record did not demonstrate that the Petitioner's specific proposed work had broader national or global implications. The Petitioner's evidence only described contributions from his current graduate work, and he failed to show how his future work at the university would impact the U.S.…
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that although the Petitioner's field of power grid research is broadly important, the record did not demonstrate that the Petitioner's specific proposed work had broader national or global implications. The Petitioner's evidence only described contributions from his current graduate work, and he failed to show how his future work at the university would impact the U.S. power grid or offer original innovations at a level of national importance.
The AAO agreed with the Director that the proposed endeavor lacks national importance, explaining that background/experience is immaterial to prong 1, the employment verification letter does not establish national impact, and benefits to the employer would be offset by negative effects on ports and other entities.
为什么值得参考
对照裁决如何区分“领域整体重要”与“申请人具体工作将产生的未来影响”。
查看完整裁决理由 +
The AAO agreed with the Director that the proposed endeavor lacks national importance, explaining that background/experience is immaterial to prong 1, the employment verification letter does not establish national impact, and benefits to the employer would be offset by negative effects on ports and other entities.