AAO found that a certificate from the American Chamber of Commerce in Brazil certified the Petitioner's attendance at the competition as a judge, and the competition was in his field. This established his participation as a judge of the work of others, and AAO withdrew SCOPS' contrary finding.
为什么值得参考
了解评审邀请、已完成任务及评审性质如何被记录和衡量。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that a certificate from the American Chamber of Commerce in Brazil certified the Petitioner's attendance at the competition as a judge, and the competition was in his field. This established his participation as a judge of the work of others, and AAO withdrew SCOPS' contrary finding.
AAO did not conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed the initial evidence threshold. AAO nonetheless noted the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
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 did not conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed the initial evidence threshold. AAO nonetheless noted the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed the criterion did not readily apply to the Petitioner's occupation but found the comparable evidence provision unsatisfied because speaking engagements are not the Petitioner's work product in his field of restaurant franchising entrepreneurship. SCOPS' failure to address comparable evidence was harmless error.
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 the criterion did not readily apply to the Petitioner's occupation but found the comparable evidence provision unsatisfied because speaking engagements are not the Petitioner's work product in his field of restaurant franchising entrepreneurship. SCOPS' failure to address comparable evidence was harmless error.
comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) for criterion (x) (commercial success in performing arts)
AAO 为什么未被说服
Counsel's unsubstantiated assertions do not constitute evidence, and the appellate statement failed to explain how the proffered evidence has comparable significance to box office receipts and commercial success evidence in the performing arts.
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 +
Counsel's unsubstantiated assertions do not constitute evidence, and the appellate statement failed to explain how the proffered evidence has comparable significance to box office receipts and commercial success evidence in the performing arts.
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
AAO 为什么未被说服
The association's statute showed membership is based on professional qualifications, level of education, payment of fees, or donation of goods/services—not on outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. Thus the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the association requires outstanding achievements of its members.
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 association's statute showed membership is based on professional qualifications, level of education, payment of fees, or donation of goods/services—not on outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. Thus the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the association requires outstanding achievements of its members.
The evidence showed the Petitioner earned $147,000, which is below the average Canadian CEO salary of $183,118. Because his salary was below average, he failed to demonstrate a high salary or significantly high remuneration relative to others in his field.
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 evidence showed the Petitioner earned $147,000, which is below the average Canadian CEO salary of $183,118. Because his salary was below average, he failed to demonstrate a high salary or significantly high remuneration relative to others in his field.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards
AAO 为什么未被说服
Four of six award certificates were issued to the Petitioner's company, not to the Petitioner personally. One remaining award was for philanthropy rather than excellence in the field. The two awards naming the Petitioner did not demonstrate issuance for excellence in the field. None of the awards demonstrated national or international recognition through independent, objective evidence.
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 +
Four of six award certificates were issued to the Petitioner's company, not to the Petitioner personally. One remaining award was for philanthropy rather than excellence in the field. The two awards naming the Petitioner did not demonstrate issuance for excellence in the field. None of the awards demonstrated national or international recognition through independent, objective evidence.
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
Letters from two of three former employers did not explain how the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role. The record lacked supporting evidence of the claimed accomplishments. While the Petitioner had a leading role in his own founded companies, neither those companies nor the Canadian bank had demonstrated distinguished reputations.
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 +
Letters from two of three former employers did not explain how the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role. The record lacked supporting evidence of the claimed accomplishments. While the Petitioner had a leading role in his own founded companies, neither those companies nor the Canadian bank had demonstrated distinguished reputations.