The four anecdotal, uncorroborated letters relate exclusively to accomplishments before February 2000, more than nine years before filing, and do not show the petitioner has risen to the very top of his field or sustained 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 +
The four anecdotal, uncorroborated letters relate exclusively to accomplishments before February 2000, more than nine years before filing, and do not show the petitioner has risen to the very top of his field or sustained acclaim.
AAO found the petitioner lacked sufficient net income ($9,226) and net current assets ($8,583) for 2009 to cover the $93,000 proffered wage, paid the beneficiary no documented wages, and the bank statements submitted on appeal were not among the enumerated types of evidence and could not demonstrate sustainable 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 +
AAO found the petitioner lacked sufficient net income ($9,226) and net current assets ($8,583) for 2009 to cover the $93,000 proffered wage, paid the beneficiary no documented wages, and the bank statements submitted on appeal were not among the enumerated types of evidence and could not demonstrate sustainable ability to pay. Totality of circumstances also weighed against the petitioner given modest gross receipts, low officer compensation, and absence of multi-year financial history.
AAO sua sponte found that the petitioner's suspended corporate status at the California Secretary of State undermined the legitimacy of the job offer and the credibility of the record as a whole.
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 sua sponte found that the petitioner's suspended corporate status at the California Secretary of State undermined the legitimacy of the job offer and the credibility of the record as a whole.
original contributions of major significance in the field
证据为何得到认可
AAO found that expert letters clearly describe how the petitioner's scientific contributions are original and of major significance, corroborated by over 200 citations to her published findings.
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 +
AAO found that expert letters clearly describe how the petitioner's scientific contributions are original and of major significance, corroborated by over 200 citations to her published findings.
The letters contain vague, bare assertions without showing that the petitioner's work changed how accountants perform audits or how businesses conduct mergers. No corroborating evidence (published material, independent adoption of methodologies) was submitted.
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 letters contain vague, bare assertions without showing that the petitioner's work changed how accountants perform audits or how businesses conduct mergers. No corroborating evidence (published material, independent adoption of methodologies) was submitted.
Plans to expand a not-yet-successful local program nationally are speculative; without a successful model demonstrating national benefits, the proposal does not satisfy national scope.
为什么值得参考
识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣，以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。
查看完整裁决理由 +
Plans to expand a not-yet-successful local program nationally are speculative; without a successful model demonstrating national benefits, the proposal does not satisfy national scope.
Only IEEE membership was adequately documented; OGF and other 'memberships' were printouts saved to petitioner's own computer with reduced evidentiary value, and the regulation requires associations in the plural.
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 +
Only IEEE membership was adequately documented; OGF and other 'memberships' were printouts saved to petitioner's own computer with reduced evidentiary value, and the regulation requires associations in the plural.