AAO agreed that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor of owning and operating an IT and cybersecurity consulting firm lacks the broader implications or substantial positive economic effects indicative of national importance. The relevant question is the impact of the specific endeavor, not the importance of the IT and cybersecurity field generally.…
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 that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor of owning and operating an IT and cybersecurity consulting firm lacks the broader implications or substantial positive economic effects indicative of national importance. The relevant question is the impact of the specific endeavor, not the importance of the IT and cybersecurity field generally. Evidence of qualifications and prior achievements is material to prong two, not prong one.
AAO found the SBA article speaks only to the general importance of small businesses, not to the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Working in an important field is insufficient to establish national importance of the specific endeavor.
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 SBA article speaks only to the general importance of small businesses, not to the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Working in an important field is insufficient to establish national importance of the specific endeavor.
AAO conducted a multi-page de novo analysis and concluded the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor, withdrawing the Director's unsupported finding.
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 conducted a multi-page de novo analysis and concluded the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor, withdrawing the Director's unsupported finding.
AAO withdrew the Director's finding, noting the Petitioner holds only the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree and lacked either a higher degree or five years of post-baccalaureate experience at the time of filing.
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 finding, noting the Petitioner holds only the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree and lacked either a higher degree or five years of post-baccalaureate experience at the time of filing.
AAO reserved judgment on the second prong, holding that because the Petitioner failed the first prong it was unnecessary to reach the second and third prongs.
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 reserved judgment on the second prong, holding that because the Petitioner failed the first prong it was unnecessary to reach the second and third prongs.
The professional plan lacked essential details about the proposed endeavor—such as location, number of employees, wages, and scope of operations—and therefore the record did not establish how the proposed upstart mechanical and electrical maintenance services company may have national or global implications or significant potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic effects.
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 +
The professional plan lacked essential details about the proposed endeavor—such as location, number of employees, wages, and scope of operations—and therefore the record did not establish how the proposed upstart mechanical and electrical maintenance services company may have national or global implications or significant potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic effects.
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
裁决如何说明
AAO explicitly reserved its opinion on the third Dhanasar prong because the first prong was not met and a finding on the third prong was unnecessary to the result.
为什么值得参考
理解除了希望自我申请之外，哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO explicitly reserved its opinion on the third Dhanasar prong because the first prong was not met and a finding on the third prong was unnecessary to the result.
AAO explicitly reserved its opinion on the second Dhanasar prong because the first prong was not met and a finding on the second prong was unnecessary to the result.
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 explicitly reserved its opinion on the second Dhanasar prong because the first prong was not met and a finding on the second prong was unnecessary to the result.