AAO found at step one that the Petitioner's quality control methodologies, adopted in the AFS Mold and Core Test Handbook and implemented broadly across the U.S. casting industry, satisfied this criterion.
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 at step one that the Petitioner's quality control methodologies, adopted in the AFS Mold and Core Test Handbook and implemented broadly across the U.S. casting industry, satisfied this criterion.
license to practice the profession or certification (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(C))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the Nevada CDL had expired in 2017 and the Washington driver license was not for a profession or occupation, so the Petitioner did not establish he holds a license to practice a profession.
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 Nevada CDL had expired in 2017 and the Washington driver license was not for a profession or occupation, so the Petitioner did not establish he holds a license to practice a profession.
membership in professional associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))
AAO 为什么未被说服
Memberships were issued to the business rather than the Petitioner individually, and the record did not show that AMSA or WMC requires a U.S. bachelor's degree (or equivalent) for membership such that they constitute professional associations.
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 +
Memberships were issued to the business rather than the Petitioner individually, and the record did not show that AMSA or WMC requires a U.S. bachelor's degree (or equivalent) for membership such that they constitute professional associations.
AAO reserved consideration of the national importance clause because it found the substantial merit element of prong 1 was not met, making it unnecessary to reach 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 reserved consideration of the national importance clause because it found the substantial merit element of prong 1 was not met, making it unnecessary to reach national importance.
AAO found the proposed endeavor vaguely described such that its nature could not be discerned, the evidence (including a letter from a prospective partner and general articles) did not show how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would accomplish its stated goals, and the Petitioner's voluntary dissolution of B- LLC while the petition was pending was inconsistent with his stated intent and unexplained.
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 proposed endeavor vaguely described such that its nature could not be discerned, the evidence (including a letter from a prospective partner and general articles) did not show how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would accomplish its stated goals, and the Petitioner's voluntary dissolution of B- LLC while the petition was pending was inconsistent with his stated intent and unexplained.