The invitation and program cover lacked certified translations; the supporting letter was not primary evidence and did not satisfy affidavit requirements; and the petitioner submitted only one letter where multiple affidavits would be required as a last resort.
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 invitation and program cover lacked certified translations; the supporting letter was not primary evidence and did not satisfy affidavit requirements; and the petitioner submitted only one letter where multiple affidavits would be required as a last resort.
intent to continue work in area of expertise in the United States
AAO 为什么未被说服
The petitioner left Part 6 of Form I-140 blank and submitted no employer letters, contracts, or personal statement demonstrating plans to continue work in the United States.
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 left Part 6 of Form I-140 blank and submitted no employer letters, contracts, or personal statement demonstrating plans to continue work in the United States.
None of the submitted articles met all regulatory requirements (missing dates, authors, evidence of major media status, or full certified translations), and the petitioner did not contest the director's findings on appeal.
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 +
None of the submitted articles met all regulatory requirements (missing dates, authors, evidence of major media status, or full certified translations), and the petitioner did not contest the director's findings on appeal.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO withdrew the director's finding because the record contained no primary evidence (such as copies of awards) and the petitioner failed to show the awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
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 because the record contained no primary evidence (such as copies of awards) and the petitioner failed to show the awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
AAO withdrew the director's finding: translations were uncertified and lacked author names, the magazine's major-media status rested on self-serving editor statements, the article merely listed petitioner's name in competition results, and the TV interview lacked supporting 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 withdrew the director's finding: translations were uncertified and lacked author names, the magazine's major-media status rested on self-serving editor statements, the article merely listed petitioner's name in competition results, and the TV interview lacked supporting evidence.
AAO withdrew the director's finding because the letters inconsistently described the petitioner as a 'referee' versus 'judge,' the events referenced shifted between submissions, and there was no evidence that he actually judged competitors' work (e.g., scoring) rather than enforcing rules.
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 +
AAO withdrew the director's finding because the letters inconsistently described the petitioner as a 'referee' versus 'judge,' the events referenced shifted between submissions, and there was no evidence that he actually judged competitors' work (e.g., scoring) rather than enforcing rules.