AAO found that while net income and net current assets for individual years sometimes exceeded the single beneficiary's proffered wage, the petitioner's hundreds of simultaneously pending petitions meant it had to show ability to pay all beneficiaries' combined wages. It failed to do so, and alternative evidence such as bank statements, gross receipts, and the CFO letter were legally insufficient or unpersuasive.
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 that while net income and net current assets for individual years sometimes exceeded the single beneficiary's proffered wage, the petitioner's hundreds of simultaneously pending petitions meant it had to show ability to pay all beneficiaries' combined wages. It failed to do so, and alternative evidence such as bank statements, gross receipts, and the CFO letter were legally insufficient or unpersuasive.
AAO found the paystubs established ability to pay from July 2009 onward, but no evidence of wages paid between the priority date and July 2009 existed in the record.
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 paystubs established ability to pay from July 2009 onward, but no evidence of wages paid between the priority date and July 2009 existed in the record.
While the 2008 net income of $114,912 exceeded the proffered wage in isolation, the petitioner filed hundreds of immigration petitions and had obligations to pay dozens of other beneficiaries simultaneously, making the net income insufficient. The 2009 financial statements were unaudited and therefore could not be credited.
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 +
While the 2008 net income of $114,912 exceeded the proffered wage in isolation, the petitioner filed hundreds of immigration petitions and had obligations to pay dozens of other beneficiaries simultaneously, making the net income insufficient. The 2009 financial statements were unaudited and therefore could not be credited.
AAO found no facts paralleling Sonegawa sufficient to establish ability to pay, no evidence of uncharacteristic business losses, and no evidence the beneficiary was replacing a former employee whose duties matched the ETA Form 9089. Wages paid to subcontractors or departed workers cannot serve as proxy for ability to pay the beneficiary's proffered wage.
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 no facts paralleling Sonegawa sufficient to establish ability to pay, no evidence of uncharacteristic business losses, and no evidence the beneficiary was replacing a former employee whose duties matched the ETA Form 9089. Wages paid to subcontractors or departed workers cannot serve as proxy for ability to pay the beneficiary's proffered wage.
The petitioner did not respond to the NOID requesting tax returns, financial statements, and wage records, so the ability-to-pay deficiency remained unresolved.
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 respond to the NOID requesting tax returns, financial statements, and wage records, so the ability-to-pay deficiency remained unresolved.