membership in professional associations (criterion E)
AAO 为什么未被说服
Because dance studio owner/operator does not qualify as a 'profession' under the regulations, the Petitioner cannot satisfy the professional association membership 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 +
Because dance studio owner/operator does not qualify as a 'profession' under the regulations, the Petitioner cannot satisfy the professional association membership criterion.
final merits determination — degree of expertise significantly above ordinary
AAO 为什么未被说服
While the Petitioner submitted dance awards and recommendation letters, she did not provide evidence comparing her ability as a dance studio owner to that ordinarily encountered in the field, so she failed to show a degree of expertise significantly above ordinary.
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 +
While the Petitioner submitted dance awards and recommendation letters, she did not provide evidence comparing her ability as a dance studio owner to that ordinarily encountered in the field, so she failed to show a degree of expertise significantly above ordinary.
The ballet certificate does not demonstrate that the issuing institution qualifies as a 'college, university, school or other institution of learning' or that the certificate is an 'official academic record.' The high school diploma is unrelated to the area of expertise.
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 ballet certificate does not demonstrate that the issuing institution qualifies as a 'college, university, school or other institution of learning' or that the certificate is an 'official academic record.' The high school diploma is unrelated to the area of expertise.
five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed with the Director that documentation from both employers failed to demonstrate progressive growth in responsibilities. Since the Petitioner graduated in April 2016, experience prior to that date is not post-baccalaureate, leaving only four and a half years with the primary employer.…
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 agreed with the Director that documentation from both employers failed to demonstrate progressive growth in responsibilities. Since the Petitioner graduated in April 2016, experience prior to that date is not post-baccalaureate, leaving only four and a half years with the primary employer. The undisclosed second employer's letter also lacked detail on progression, and the unexplained omission of that employer created an unresolved material inconsistency.
AAO agrees the projected scale (9 employees, $720,000 in sales against a $329 billion market) does not show broad national impact, and the record lacks specificity showing how the consulting services would impact small/medium businesses or industries served 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 agrees the projected scale (9 employees, $720,000 in sales against a $329 billion market) does not show broad national impact, and the record lacks specificity showing how the consulting services would impact small/medium businesses or industries served at a national level.
AAO found that the articles and reports did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed undertaking or demonstrate how his consulting services extend beyond his company and clients to impact the field or U.S. economy more broadly. Government initiatives recognizing small businesses did not indicate particular government interest in the Petitioner's specific activity.…
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 articles and reports did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed undertaking or demonstrate how his consulting services extend beyond his company and clients to impact the field or U.S. economy more broadly. Government initiatives recognizing small businesses did not indicate particular government interest in the Petitioner's specific activity. The shortage-of-consultants argument was insufficient, and the business plan projections lacked supporting documentation. Expert opinion letters were too general and did not explain how the Petitioner's specific endeavor rises to national importance.
Final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's Chinese theater awards and articles about acting were insufficient to show he has risen to the very top of his field, and rejected the argument that the number of criteria met automatically determines the final merits outcome. The Petitioner's challenge to the Director's review standard was dismissed as conclusory for failure to identify specific errors.
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 agreed that the Petitioner's Chinese theater awards and articles about acting were insufficient to show he has risen to the very top of his field, and rejected the argument that the number of criteria met automatically determines the final merits outcome. The Petitioner's challenge to the Director's review standard was dismissed as conclusory for failure to identify specific errors.
AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit (health) but concluded Petitioner conflated the importance of the profession with the impact of her specific endeavor, provided unsupported business projections, did not show operation in an economically depressed area or significant employment impact, and did not show how her local clinical work would broadly impact the field or STEM.
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 the endeavor has substantial merit (health) but concluded Petitioner conflated the importance of the profession with the impact of her specific endeavor, provided unsupported business projections, did not show operation in an economically depressed area or significant employment impact, and did not show how her local clinical work would broadly impact the field or STEM.