The Petitioner did not demonstrate that 'responsibility for engineering work of substantial importance' rises to the level of 'outstanding achievements,' nor that admission to ASCE Member grade is judged by recognized national or international experts.
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 did not demonstrate that 'responsibility for engineering work of substantial importance' rises to the level of 'outstanding achievements,' nor that admission to ASCE Member grade is judged by recognized national or international experts.
The Petitioner's base salary of $97,500–$105,000 does not exceed the 75th percentile for civil engineers nationally. Non-guaranteed compensation and benefits are not salary. The Petitioner's comparison data was limited to average or mean wages and self-reported sources, which is insufficient to show a high salary relative to others performing similar work in 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 Petitioner's base salary of $97,500–$105,000 does not exceed the 75th percentile for civil engineers nationally. Non-guaranteed compensation and benefits are not salary. The Petitioner's comparison data was limited to average or mean wages and self-reported sources, which is insufficient to show a high salary relative to others performing similar work in the field.
The recommendation letters do not contain sufficient detail or explanation of originality, and the record lacks corroborating evidence demonstrating the Petitioner's work has influenced the field beyond his employer and clients. The evidence does not show major significance at the field-wide level.
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 recommendation letters do not contain sufficient detail or explanation of originality, and the record lacks corroborating evidence demonstrating the Petitioner's work has influenced the field beyond his employer and clients. The evidence does not show major significance at the field-wide level.
AAO reversed the Director, finding the Globee article lacked required date and author information and there was no evidence it is a professional or major trade publication. The NewsBreak.com article appeared to be marketing material and the Petitioner failed to show NewsBreak.com qualifies as major media given the limited comparison data provided.
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 reversed the Director, finding the Globee article lacked required date and author information and there was no evidence it is a professional or major trade publication. The NewsBreak.com article appeared to be marketing material and the Petitioner failed to show NewsBreak.com qualifies as major media given the limited comparison data provided.
The newly submitted Technology Plan Supplement does not address how the proposed VR education endeavor has broader implications indicative of national importance—e.g., national/global implications, improved manufacturing or medical advances, or significant potential to employ U.S. workers. General education/technology documents do not identify the Petitioner or her specific endeavor, making them immaterial.…
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 newly submitted Technology Plan Supplement does not address how the proposed VR education endeavor has broader implications indicative of national importance—e.g., national/global implications, improved manufacturing or medical advances, or significant potential to employ U.S. workers. General education/technology documents do not identify the Petitioner or her specific endeavor, making them immaterial. Letters of support contain very little specific information about the proposed endeavor's national importance. Evidence about a prior project the Petitioner participated in does not inform how the prospective endeavor may have national importance.
AAO reserved the formal final merits determination under Bagamasbad because the step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in dicta that the record in the aggregate did not establish the required acclaim.
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 the formal final merits determination under Bagamasbad because the step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in dicta that the record in the aggregate did not establish the required acclaim.
AAO found the Sina article was effectively anonymous because the credit was ambiguous and there was no information about 'News Express.' Translator certifications were dated nearly a year before the articles' publication and the materials appeared to be machine 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 +
AAO found the Sina article was effectively anonymous because the credit was ambiguous and there was no information about 'News Express.' Translator certifications were dated nearly a year before the articles' publication and the materials appeared to be machine translations.