leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with distinguished reputation
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the Director applied an improper standard by requiring employer verification, as the regulations do not require such evidence, and the Director failed to sufficiently discuss a submitted employer letter. The Director also did not explain the translation certification issue.
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 Director applied an improper standard by requiring employer verification, as the regulations do not require such evidence, and the Director failed to sufficiently discuss a submitted employer letter. The Director also did not explain the translation certification issue.
published material about the individual in professional or major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the Director's analysis deficient: the Director cited translation certification problems without explaining what was wrong, and failed to address the submitted evidence with any specificity. The matter is remanded for proper analysis.
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 Director's analysis deficient: the Director cited translation certification problems without explaining what was wrong, and failed to address the submitted evidence with any specificity. The matter is remanded for proper analysis.
AAO found the Petitioner's work as a CHO at a specific hospital would not have impact beyond that hospital's patients, lacked plans for novel methodologies to be disseminated industry-wide, and did not demonstrate sufficient potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic effects at a national level.
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 +
AAO found the Petitioner's work as a CHO at a specific hospital would not have impact beyond that hospital's patients, lacked plans for novel methodologies to be disseminated industry-wide, and did not demonstrate sufficient potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic effects at a national level.
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer
裁决如何说明
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong because the petitioner's failure on the first and second prongs was dispositive of the appeal, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong because the petitioner's failure on the first and second prongs was dispositive of the appeal, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.