AAO found the Petitioner lacks formal education or experience in business, curriculum development, teacher training, grant writing, or educational policy development at relevant levels; has not taken steps to create a legal entity or obtain accreditation; has not shown she possesses the funds she proposes to invest; and has provided no evidence of interest from potential customers or investors.
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 +
AAO found the Petitioner lacks formal education or experience in business, curriculum development, teacher training, grant writing, or educational policy development at relevant levels; has not taken steps to create a legal entity or obtain accreditation; has not shown she possesses the funds she proposes to invest; and has provided no evidence of interest from potential customers or investors.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
AAO 为什么未被说服
The recommendation letters described only the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and positive personal qualities, but did not demonstrate recognition for noteworthy achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field at a level indicative of exceptional ability. Recognition limited to employers and clients on specific projects is insufficient.
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 recommendation letters described only the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and positive personal qualities, but did not demonstrate recognition for noteworthy achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field at a level indicative of exceptional ability. Recognition limited to employers and clients on specific projects is insufficient.
AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the Petitioner met this criterion. The employment letters did not adequately reflect ten years of full-time experience in the proposed occupation as a procurement and import specialist, as two letters described work as a sales trader, one letter lacked job duties and full-time confirmation, and one letter contained an incomplete certified English translation.
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 withdrew the Director's finding that the Petitioner met this criterion. The employment letters did not adequately reflect ten years of full-time experience in the proposed occupation as a procurement and import specialist, as two letters described work as a sales trader, one letter lacked job duties and full-time confirmation, and one letter contained an incomplete certified English translation.
Generalized information about the legal profession and business does not address how the specific endeavor would have national or global implications. The RFE-introduced plans to found a legal tech company and provide cybersecurity services to the government constitute new material facts that cannot establish eligibility because they were not asserted at the time of filing.…
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 +
Generalized information about the legal profession and business does not address how the specific endeavor would have national or global implications. The RFE-introduced plans to found a legal tech company and provide cybersecurity services to the government constitute new material facts that cannot establish eligibility because they were not asserted at the time of filing. The endeavor as properly described only benefits individual clients without broader national implications.
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis, finding that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor — continuing compliance work for her employer — did not extend beyond her current or future employers to impact the fields of healthcare fraud or tax compliance at a national level. The Petitioner also failed to show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects.
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 that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor — continuing compliance work for her employer — did not extend beyond her current or future employers to impact the fields of healthcare fraud or tax compliance at a national level. The Petitioner also failed to show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects.