Beneficiary meets minimum education requirement stated on labor certification (bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering technology)
AAO 为什么未被说服
EDGE (AACRAO) indicates the beneficiary's Mexican diploma is comparable to U.S. senior high school completion, not a foreign equivalent bachelor's degree. The credential evaluations improperly used work experience to substitute for education and applied an H-1B-specific equivalence formula that does not apply to immigrant 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 +
EDGE (AACRAO) indicates the beneficiary's Mexican diploma is comparable to U.S. senior high school completion, not a foreign equivalent bachelor's degree. The credential evaluations improperly used work experience to substitute for education and applied an H-1B-specific equivalence formula that does not apply to immigrant petitions. A three-year or vocational-level credential cannot constitute a 'foreign equivalent degree' to a U.S. baccalaureate degree under Matter of Shah and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2).
EB-2 advanced degree classification requires services to be sought by a U.S. employer; only an employer may file a petition under this provision, not the individual himself.
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 +
EB-2 advanced degree classification requires services to be sought by a U.S. employer; only an employer may file a petition under this provision, not the individual himself.
The petitioner could not obtain an individual labor certification from USDOL because labor certifications are only approved for self-employed persons and employing organizations seeking additional workers, not for an individual seeking to be his own employer.
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 could not obtain an individual labor certification from USDOL because labor certifications are only approved for self-employed persons and employing organizations seeking additional workers, not for an individual seeking to be his own employer.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
The expert letters were based on assumptions about the petitioner's role rather than factual accounts, failed to distinguish the petitioner from other Cirque du Soleil performers, and did not establish that his role was leading or critical. Moreover, the regulation requires a leading or critical role for more than one distinguished organization, and no evidence was provided for any other organization.
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 expert letters were based on assumptions about the petitioner's role rather than factual accounts, failed to distinguish the petitioner from other Cirque du Soleil performers, and did not establish that his role was leading or critical. Moreover, the regulation requires a leading or critical role for more than one distinguished organization, and no evidence was provided for any other organization.
The Volkov Cup has not been consistently held and appears to be a qualifying competition for the European Team Championship rather than a globally recognized top award. The petitioner's second-place finishes are not remotely comparable to awards such as the Pulitzer Prize, the Academy Award, or an Olympic Medal.
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 Volkov Cup has not been consistently held and appears to be a qualifying competition for the European Team Championship rather than a globally recognized top award. The petitioner's second-place finishes are not remotely comparable to awards such as the Pulitzer Prize, the Academy Award, or an Olympic Medal.
The AAO withdrew the director's finding, holding that dance performances do not qualify as artistic exhibitions or showcases under the plain language of criterion vii, which is limited to visual artists displaying tangible work. Additionally, the Dancing with the Stars appearance did not specifically single out the petitioner.
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, holding that dance performances do not qualify as artistic exhibitions or showcases under the plain language of criterion vii, which is limited to visual artists displaying tangible work. Additionally, the Dancing with the Stars appearance did not specifically single out the petitioner.
The AAO found the petitioner's earnings fell below the top ten percent of dancers per BLS data and that the comparison data submitted was geographically limited to California, failing to demonstrate significantly high remuneration compared to other professional ballroom dance competitors and teachers nationally.
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 petitioner's earnings fell below the top ten percent of dancers per BLS data and that the comparison data submitted was geographically limited to California, failing to demonstrate significantly high remuneration compared to other professional ballroom dance competitors and teachers nationally.
The AAO conducted a final merits determination and found that the petitioner's competition wins were at sub-professional levels (Junior, Amateur, Rising Star), his professional competition wins involved very few competitors, published material was deficient, and his remuneration was not significantly high—none of which established sustained national or international acclaim 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 +
The AAO conducted a final merits determination and found that the petitioner's competition wins were at sub-professional levels (Junior, Amateur, Rising Star), his professional competition wins involved very few competitors, published material was deficient, and his remuneration was not significantly high—none of which established sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
The AAO found the petitioner failed to establish Vivo Dancesport Center has a distinguished reputation—relying only on self-promotional materials and a single article in a limited-circulation Chinese-language publication.…
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 petitioner failed to establish Vivo Dancesport Center has a distinguished reputation—relying only on self-promotional materials and a single article in a limited-circulation Chinese-language publication. Additionally, the regulation's use of the plural 'organizations or establishments' requires evidence of a leading/critical role at more than one distinguished organization, which the petitioner did not provide.
The AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that none of the submitted materials satisfied criterion iii: event results lacked required publication details, the International News articles lacked full translations and were about competitions rather than the petitioner, and the Dance Beat article only briefly mentioned the petitioner and was not supported by objective circulation evidence showing it was 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 AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that none of the submitted materials satisfied criterion iii: event results lacked required publication details, the International News articles lacked full translations and were about competitions rather than the petitioner, and the Dance Beat article only briefly mentioned the petitioner and was not supported by objective circulation evidence showing it was major media.