AAO found that the Petitioner's expert letters and evidence addressed her individual qualifications and the importance of the financial manager industry generally, rather than the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor. Individual experience and qualifications are material to Dhanasar prong two, not prong one. AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis.
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 that the Petitioner's expert letters and evidence addressed her individual qualifications and the importance of the financial manager industry generally, rather than the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor. Individual experience and qualifications are material to Dhanasar prong two, not prong one. AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis.
Even accepting the Petitioner's endeavor as articulated on appeal, AAO found it has substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner's contributions to accounting knowledge and financial literacy lack demonstrated impact beyond her coworkers and clients.…
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 +
Even accepting the Petitioner's endeavor as articulated on appeal, AAO found it has substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner's contributions to accounting knowledge and financial literacy lack demonstrated impact beyond her coworkers and clients. Her expert letter's claim of significant economic potential relates to the general accounting field, not her specific endeavor, and occupational shortages are addressed through the labor certification process rather than the NIW framework.
AAO reiterates its prior holding that the Petitioner's general claims about boosting local economies and supporting small businesses lacked probative supporting evidence, and that past experience does not establish national importance.
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 reiterates its prior holding that the Petitioner's general claims about boosting local economies and supporting small businesses lacked probative supporting evidence, and that past experience does not establish national importance.
AAO agrees the endeavor has substantial merit but does not concur with the Director's determination that it rises to the level of national importance; AAO declines to further address this issue given the remand.
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 agrees the endeavor has substantial merit but does not concur with the Director's determination that it rises to the level of national importance; AAO declines to further address this issue given the remand.
The Director erroneously stated the Petitioner submitted no evidence on prong two, but the record contained educational records, resume, personal statement, letters of recommendation, a business plan, and financial documents. AAO withdraws the Director's determination and remands for reassessment.
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 +
The Director erroneously stated the Petitioner submitted no evidence on prong two, but the record contained educational records, resume, personal statement, letters of recommendation, a business plan, and financial documents. AAO withdraws the Director's determination and remands for reassessment.
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
裁决如何说明
AAO finds the Director failed to discuss evidence such as the business plan showing current employment, and reached an internally inconsistent conclusion compared to the prong-one finding. AAO withdraws and remands for reassessment.
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 finds the Director failed to discuss evidence such as the business plan showing current employment, and reached an internally inconsistent conclusion compared to the prong-one finding. AAO withdraws and remands for reassessment.
U.S. baccalaureate or foreign equivalent + 5 years progressive experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO concurred that the Beneficiary lacks the requisite U.S. baccalaureate or foreign equivalent, that experience cannot be used to construct the equivalent of a baccalaureate, and that the Petitioner's evidence was internally inconsistent and undermined by the invalidation of the foreign diploma.
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 concurred that the Beneficiary lacks the requisite U.S. baccalaureate or foreign equivalent, that experience cannot be used to construct the equivalent of a baccalaureate, and that the Petitioner's evidence was internally inconsistent and undermined by the invalidation of the foreign diploma.
Beneficiary meets minimum requirements stated on labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO independently observed that part H.7. of the labor certification barred any alternate combination of education and experience, so the Petitioner's experience-based theory could not satisfy the certified position's requirements.
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 independently observed that part H.7. of the labor certification barred any alternate combination of education and experience, so the Petitioner's experience-based theory could not satisfy the certified position's requirements.