AAO found the employment letters were insufficient because they failed to specify full-time or part-time status, and there was an unexplained overlapping period of employment at two companies from March 2012 to September 2016, preventing reliable verification of five years of progressive experience.
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 employment letters were insufficient because they failed to specify full-time or part-time status, and there was an unexplained overlapping period of employment at two companies from March 2012 to September 2016, preventing reliable verification of five years of progressive experience.
AAO agreed with the Director that the endeavor lacks national importance because the evidence does not show the Petitioner's specific endeavor will have national/global implications or substantial economic effects beyond his own clients.
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 with the Director that the endeavor lacks national importance because the evidence does not show the Petitioner's specific endeavor will have national/global implications or substantial economic effects beyond his own clients.
AAO noted that the Petitioner's letters of support and qualifications relate to the second prong but did not evaluate it because the first prong was dispositive.
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 noted that the Petitioner's letters of support and qualifications relate to the second prong but did not evaluate it because the first prong was dispositive.
AAO found it impossible to evaluate whether the Petitioner was well-positioned because the proposed endeavor was inconsistently expressed across proceedings. The letters of support spoke favorably of the Petitioner but did not demonstrate persisting interest or support in the proposed endeavor, and it remained unclear how the Petitioner would execute the endeavor.
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 it impossible to evaluate whether the Petitioner was well-positioned because the proposed endeavor was inconsistently expressed across proceedings. The letters of support spoke favorably of the Petitioner but did not demonstrate persisting interest or support in the proposed endeavor, and it remained unclear how the Petitioner would execute the endeavor.
AAO withdrew the Director's conclusion because a baccalaureate degree alone does not meet the definition of an advanced degree, but reserved the ultimate eligibility determination because the NIW waiver analysis is dispositive.
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 conclusion because a baccalaureate degree alone does not meet the definition of an advanced degree, but reserved the ultimate eligibility determination because the NIW waiver analysis is dispositive.
The AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirement, but noted in an advisory capacity that the record does not support the required 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 +
The AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirement, but noted in an advisory capacity that the record does not support the required acclaim.
AAO agreed the signature was deficient because USCIS policy requires that any photocopy submitted be of an original document bearing an original handwritten signature. The Petitioner's method of scanning a signature from a separate piece of paper and electronically inserting it into the forms does not meet this requirement, even if the original signature itself was handwritten.
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 signature was deficient because USCIS policy requires that any photocopy submitted be of an original document bearing an original handwritten signature. The Petitioner's method of scanning a signature from a separate piece of paper and electronically inserting it into the forms does not meet this requirement, even if the original signature itself was handwritten.