on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer and labor certification
裁决如何说明
AAO explicitly reserved judgment on the third Dhanasar prong because the petitioner was already found ineligible on prongs one and two, making the third prong unnecessary to the decision.
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 judgment on the third Dhanasar prong because the petitioner was already found ineligible on prongs one and two, making the third prong unnecessary to the decision.
AAO found the personal statement unreliable due to unauthenticated pixelated signatures and lack of identified translator, undermining its probative value. Even if credited, the proposed consulting business described tailor-made services for individual clients with no national or global implications, no improved processes, and no meaningful employment of U.S. workers as contemplated by Dhanasar.
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 personal statement unreliable due to unauthenticated pixelated signatures and lack of identified translator, undermining its probative value. Even if credited, the proposed consulting business described tailor-made services for individual clients with no national or global implications, no improved processes, and no meaningful employment of U.S. workers as contemplated by Dhanasar.
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO disagreed with the Director and withdrew the criterion-(F) finding. The Quality Seal certificate lacked supporting documentation showing it evidenced exceptional expertise, and the letters of recommendation reflected competent professional performance rather than achievements or significant contributions significantly above the ordinary.
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 and withdrew the criterion-(F) finding. The Quality Seal certificate lacked supporting documentation showing it evidenced exceptional expertise, and the letters of recommendation reflected competent professional performance rather than achievements or significant contributions significantly above the ordinary.
Ten years of full-time experience (employer letters)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner did not submit letters from current or former employers. The accountant's letter is insufficient because the accountant was not an employer, and the remaining evidence does not describe full-time duties over ten or more years in adequate detail.
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 letters from current or former employers. The accountant's letter is insufficient because the accountant was not an employer, and the remaining evidence does not describe full-time duties over ten or more years in adequate detail.
The evidence documented a total of only 8 years and 5 months of qualifying managerial experience, less than the required 10 years. Other positions as receptionist, head of reception, and consultant were insufficient to show employment in the position of tourism and hospitality manager.
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 evidence documented a total of only 8 years and 5 months of qualifying managerial experience, less than the required 10 years. Other positions as receptionist, head of reception, and consultant were insufficient to show employment in the position of tourism and hospitality manager.
The Petitioner has not submitted evidence that he holds a license or certification for his occupation as required by the plain language of the regulation, so he does not meet this criterion.
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 has not submitted evidence that he holds a license or certification for his occupation as required by the plain language of the regulation, so he does not meet this criterion.