AAO concluded the Petitioner's proposed cybersecurity consulting services for small and medium-sized businesses did not demonstrate prospective impact rising to the level of national importance, as the evidence did not show how the endeavor would extend beyond his customers and employers or provide substantial positive economic effects at a regional or national 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 concluded the Petitioner's proposed cybersecurity consulting services for small and medium-sized businesses did not demonstrate prospective impact rising to the level of national importance, as the evidence did not show how the endeavor would extend beyond his customers and employers or provide substantial positive economic effects at a regional or national scale. The expert letter made general assertions without specific analysis, and projected revenues and employment figures did not suffice.
AAO agrees that focus must be on the specific endeavor, not the general industry, and the evidence does not show the boat building business would have impact distinct from any other small business or broadly impact the boat building industry or U.S. economy beyond clients directly served.
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 that focus must be on the specific endeavor, not the general industry, and the evidence does not show the boat building business would have impact distinct from any other small business or broadly impact the boat building industry or U.S. economy beyond clients directly served.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that letters from a former employer and customers attested to the Petitioner's diligence but did not identify significant contributions to the field, and that his book about recovering from illness did not amount to a contribution to general operational management.
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 that letters from a former employer and customers attested to the Petitioner's diligence but did not identify significant contributions to the field, and that his book about recovering from illness did not amount to a contribution to general operational management.
AAO disagreed with the Director, finding the comparative wage data was position-appropriate based on the employer's description of job duties, and that the Petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that he commands a high salary.
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 disagreed with the Director, finding the comparative wage data was position-appropriate based on the employer's description of job duties, and that the Petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that he commands a high salary.