The Petitioner did not submit evidence of an official academic record showing a degree, diploma, certificate, or similar award relating to the area of exceptional ability.
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 Petitioner did not submit evidence of an official academic record showing a degree, diploma, certificate, or similar award relating to the area of exceptional ability.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
AAO 为什么未被说服
The record does not adequately support that the Petitioner's achievements and significant contributions were recognized as significantly above those ordinarily encountered in their industry or 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 record does not adequately support that the Petitioner's achievements and significant contributions were recognized as significantly above those ordinarily encountered in their industry or field. The employer awards covering the top five percent of a worldwide sales force did not clearly represent an achievement of note in real estate development, and the internet browsing room construction project in Venezuela was not clearly connected to or significant in the real estate development field. The remaining letters evidenced competence and reliability but not exceptional achievement.
AAO did not reach a substantive conclusion on this prong, instead noting the Director's explanation was insufficient and remanding for proper analysis.
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 did not reach a substantive conclusion on this prong, instead noting the Director's explanation was insufficient and remanding for proper analysis.
AAO found the Director's decision did not describe the evidence reviewed, did not analyze any evidence submitted, did not list the factors referenced, and did not explain why the evidence was insufficient, depriving the petitioner of a meaningful opportunity to contest the decision.
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 the Director's decision did not describe the evidence reviewed, did not analyze any evidence submitted, did not list the factors referenced, and did not explain why the evidence was insufficient, depriving the petitioner of a meaningful opportunity to contest the decision.
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer requirement
裁决如何说明
AAO found the Director committed error by failing to discuss the evidence weighed in the balancing analysis or address the petitioner's specific claims, rendering the determination insufficient.
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 found the Director committed error by failing to discuss the evidence weighed in the balancing analysis or address the petitioner's specific claims, rendering the determination insufficient.
The letters from 'work' and 'ex-bosses' covered fewer than five years and lacked sufficient descriptions of duties performed, falling well short of the ten-year requirement.
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 letters from 'work' and 'ex-bosses' covered fewer than five years and lacked sufficient descriptions of duties performed, falling well short of the ten-year requirement.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
AAO 为什么未被说服
The letters described the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and positive personal qualities but did not identify any achievements or significant contributions significantly above what is ordinarily encountered in the field. Writers' conclusions alone do not constitute recognition of achievements.
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 letters described the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and positive personal qualities but did not identify any achievements or significant contributions significantly above what is ordinarily encountered in the field. Writers' conclusions alone do not constitute recognition of achievements.
license or certification to practice the profession
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner submitted an identity card rather than a license or certification, and the card contained an apparent material discrepancy in its issuance dates (July 3, 2014 on the reverse vs. February 2, 2017 on the obverse), calling its reliability and authenticity into question.
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 Petitioner submitted an identity card rather than a license or certification, and the card contained an apparent material discrepancy in its issuance dates (July 3, 2014 on the reverse vs. February 2, 2017 on the obverse), calling its reliability and authenticity into question.