EB-2 underlying classification (advanced degree or exceptional ability)
裁决如何说明
AAO deemed the EB-2 threshold issue abandoned because the petitioner did not address the Director's finding on appeal. AAO also noted independently that the academic record appears insufficient to establish a foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree.
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 deemed the EB-2 threshold issue abandoned because the petitioner did not address the Director's finding on appeal. AAO also noted independently that the academic record appears insufficient to establish a foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree.
Advanced degree equivalent qualification (bachelor's + 5 years progressive experience)
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found unresolved inconsistencies between employment letters, Form ETA-750B, and a prior nonimmigrant visa application; insufficient duty descriptions; no clear specialty; and an unexplained discrepancy between the 2011 graduation date and the 2017 diploma issuance date, all precluding a finding that the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2.
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 unresolved inconsistencies between employment letters, Form ETA-750B, and a prior nonimmigrant visa application; insufficient duty descriptions; no clear specialty; and an unexplained discrepancy between the 2011 graduation date and the 2017 diploma issuance date, all precluding a finding that the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2.
Meeting at least three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii))
裁决如何说明
AAO found the Petitioner waived any challenge to the Director's criteria analysis by offering only generalized eligibility statements without identifying specific errors in the Director's reasoning, rendering the issue abandoned on appeal under Matter of O-R-E- and Matter of R-A-M-.
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 Petitioner waived any challenge to the Director's criteria analysis by offering only generalized eligibility statements without identifying specific errors in the Director's reasoning, rendering the issue abandoned on appeal under Matter of O-R-E- and Matter of R-A-M-.
Sufficiency and consistency of evidence regarding prospective occupation/proposed endeavor
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the Petitioner presented materially inconsistent descriptions of his proposed employment — soccer coach in the petition and RFE response, but business development professional for the first time on appeal. Because eligibility must be established at the time of filing, a petitioner cannot materially change the occupation or proposed endeavor on appeal.
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 Petitioner presented materially inconsistent descriptions of his proposed employment — soccer coach in the petition and RFE response, but business development professional for the first time on appeal. Because eligibility must be established at the time of filing, a petitioner cannot materially change the occupation or proposed endeavor on appeal.
AAO formally reserved this prong because the EB-2 eligibility issue is dispositive, but noted in dicta that the Petitioner's soccer coaching endeavor would not rise to the level of national importance because it would not impact the field more broadly beyond his employer and the individuals he coaches.
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 formally reserved this prong because the EB-2 eligibility issue is dispositive, but noted in dicta that the Petitioner's soccer coaching endeavor would not rise to the level of national importance because it would not impact the field more broadly beyond his employer and the individuals he coaches.
AAO found the Director's favorable determination on prong one was flawed because it was based on an impermissibly altered proposed endeavor introduced during the RFE response, and the Director did not explain the basis for the conclusion.
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 Director's favorable determination on prong one was flawed because it was based on an impermissibly altered proposed endeavor introduced during the RFE response, and the Director did not explain the basis for the conclusion.
EB-2 underlying qualification (advanced degree or exceptional ability)
裁决如何说明
Because the Petitioner's brief did not address or contest the Director's findings on the underlying EB-2 classification, AAO deemed the issue waived and did not independently analyze it.
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 +
Because the Petitioner's brief did not address or contest the Director's findings on the underlying EB-2 classification, AAO deemed the issue waived and did not independently analyze it.