AAO declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the antecedent requirement of three types of qualifying 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 declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the antecedent requirement of three types of qualifying evidence.
AAO agrees that a three-year degree plus ICAI membership is not a single foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. baccalaureate, relying on Matter of Shah, the Snapnames decision, and EDGE.
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 agrees that a three-year degree plus ICAI membership is not a single foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. baccalaureate, relying on Matter of Shah, the Snapnames decision, and EDGE.
AAO agrees the plain language of the ETA Form 9089 required a single bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent and the beneficiary's credentials do not satisfy that requirement.
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 agrees the plain language of the ETA Form 9089 required a single bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent and the beneficiary's credentials do not satisfy that requirement.
Wages paid to beneficiary equal to or exceeding proffered wage
AAO 为什么未被说服
W-2 records show the beneficiary was paid between $70,422 and $86,073 annually—well below the $100,000 proffered wage—in each year from 2006 to 2009, creating annual deficiencies. The petitioner's subcontractor argument failed because there was no evidence those workers would be replaced by the beneficiary or that their duties matched the ETA Form 9089.
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 +
W-2 records show the beneficiary was paid between $70,422 and $86,073 annually—well below the $100,000 proffered wage—in each year from 2006 to 2009, creating annual deficiencies. The petitioner's subcontractor argument failed because there was no evidence those workers would be replaced by the beneficiary or that their duties matched the ETA Form 9089.
CFO letter as alternative evidence of ability to pay
AAO 为什么未被说服
Although USCIS may accept a CFO letter when the petitioner employs over 100 workers, it is not required to do so in lieu of tax returns or audited financial statements. In cases involving hundreds of simultaneously pending petitions, the AAO will not accept such a letter as persuasive evidence of ability to pay.
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 USCIS may accept a CFO letter when the petitioner employs over 100 workers, it is not required to do so in lieu of tax returns or audited financial statements. In cases involving hundreds of simultaneously pending petitions, the AAO will not accept such a letter as persuasive evidence of ability to pay.
Net current assets sufficient to cover proffered wage across all pending petitions
AAO 为什么未被说服
Net current assets in 2006 ($212,003) and 2007 ($419,288) exceeded the single proffered wage, but 2008 net current assets were negative (-$124,200). Considering the petitioner's aggregate obligations across all pending petitions, the net current assets were insufficient to cover the collective shortfall.
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 +
Net current assets in 2006 ($212,003) and 2007 ($419,288) exceeded the single proffered wage, but 2008 net current assets were negative (-$124,200). Considering the petitioner's aggregate obligations across all pending petitions, the net current assets were insufficient to cover the collective shortfall.
Bank statements as alternative evidence of ability to pay
AAO 为什么未被说服
Bank statements are not among the three enumerated types of evidence in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2). They show the amount in an account on a given date and cannot demonstrate a sustainable ability to pay a proffered wage. The petitioner did not show these funds were not already reflected in the tax returns.
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 +
Bank statements are not among the three enumerated types of evidence in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2). They show the amount in an account on a given date and cannot demonstrate a sustainable ability to pay a proffered wage. The petitioner did not show these funds were not already reflected in the tax returns.
Applying the Matter of Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances analysis, the AAO found no facts paralleling those in Sonegawa sufficient to establish ability to pay. The petitioner demonstrated no uncharacteristic business expenditures or losses, did not show the beneficiary was replacing a prior employee with matching duties, and could not establish it could have paid the beneficiary and the hundreds of other petition beneficia…
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 +
Applying the Matter of Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances analysis, the AAO found no facts paralleling those in Sonegawa sufficient to establish ability to pay. The petitioner demonstrated no uncharacteristic business expenditures or losses, did not show the beneficiary was replacing a prior employee with matching duties, and could not establish it could have paid the beneficiary and the hundreds of other petition beneficiaries simultaneously.