AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis, finding no error in the determination that the evidence did not establish national importance. AAO noted the Director explicitly considered all the evidence the Petitioner cited on appeal and applied the correct preponderance of the evidence standard.
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 adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis, finding no error in the determination that the evidence did not establish national importance. AAO noted the Director explicitly considered all the evidence the Petitioner cited on appeal and applied the correct preponderance of the evidence standard.
AAO found the business plan projections unsupported by objective evidence, the recommendation letters addressed individual skills rather than national-level impact, and the Petitioner's introduction of a rental space constituted an impermissible material change to the petition. The proposed endeavor did not show prospective impact beyond local clients and employees sufficient to meet 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 found the business plan projections unsupported by objective evidence, the recommendation letters addressed individual skills rather than national-level impact, and the Petitioner's introduction of a rental space constituted an impermissible material change to the petition. The proposed endeavor did not show prospective impact beyond local clients and employees sufficient to meet national importance.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor lacked national importance. Her statements reflected an intention to provide valuable services to employer(s) and customers, but the record did not support broader implications to the field. Claims about franchise management contributing to global best practices and CRM systems creating societal welfare were conclusory and unsupported.…
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 agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor lacked national importance. Her statements reflected an intention to provide valuable services to employer(s) and customers, but the record did not support broader implications to the field. Claims about franchise management contributing to global best practices and CRM systems creating societal welfare were conclusory and unsupported. The expert letter and recommendation letters lacked relevance to national importance, focusing instead on the Petitioner's expertise and background.
AAO found that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor did not demonstrate national importance. The evidence did not show that her work would extend beyond her immediate students and customers to enhance societal welfare on a broader scale.…
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 proposed endeavor did not demonstrate national importance. The evidence did not show that her work would extend beyond her immediate students and customers to enhance societal welfare on a broader scale. Resubmitted support letters addressed the Petitioner's personal achievements but not her proposed endeavor, and broad arguments about the importance of special education as a field do not satisfy the requirement of showing national importance of the specific proposed endeavor.
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor has national importance, concluding she failed to show how her consulting work would have broader implications for U.S.-Brazil trade beyond the scope of her individual 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 +
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor has national importance, concluding she failed to show how her consulting work would have broader implications for U.S.-Brazil trade beyond the scope of her individual clients.
AAO found that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not sufficiently extend beyond her own company and the families it serves to impact the broader fields of pedagogy and social work or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with 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 found that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not sufficiently extend beyond her own company and the families it serves to impact the broader fields of pedagogy and social work or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. Expert letters focused on the importance of the social work field generally rather than the Petitioner's specific endeavor, and industry research did not concern her specific proposed activities.
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
证据为何得到认可
AAO concluded, based on multiple media-ranking sources (R-'s Digital News Report 2020, S-W- analytics report, SCimago Media Rankings), that S- more likely than not qualified as major media in the Petitioner's country, and that the articles in S- about the Petitioner satisfy the criterion.
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 concluded, based on multiple media-ranking sources (R-'s Digital News Report 2020, S-W- analytics report, SCimago Media Rankings), that S- more likely than not qualified as major media in the Petitioner's country, and that the articles in S- about the Petitioner satisfy the criterion.