AAO found the Petitioner's description of her endeavor was ambiguous and lacked the specificity needed to establish national importance. General field-level research and supportive letters did not connect the Petitioner's individual consultancy to a demonstrable national-level impact.…
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 Petitioner's description of her endeavor was ambiguous and lacked the specificity needed to establish national importance. General field-level research and supportive letters did not connect the Petitioner's individual consultancy to a demonstrable national-level impact. Without a concrete plan including funding, location, specific duties, and definitive goals, the prospective impact of the endeavor could not be evaluated.
commanding salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found the contracts were for construction, installation, or maintenance of athletic surfaces—not advertising or marketing services—and even if they related to the criterion, they did not establish that the remuneration demonstrated exceptional ability relative to others in the 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 +
AAO found the contracts were for construction, installation, or maintenance of athletic surfaces—not advertising or marketing services—and even if they related to the criterion, they did not establish that the remuneration demonstrated exceptional ability relative to others in the field.
comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that comparable evidence was inapplicable because the Petitioner did not establish that the standard criteria do not readily apply to advertising and marketing specialists—in fact, the Petitioner claimed to satisfy five of the six criteria.…
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 that comparable evidence was inapplicable because the Petitioner did not establish that the standard criteria do not readily apply to advertising and marketing specialists—in fact, the Petitioner claimed to satisfy five of the six criteria. Even if considered, the contracts related to construction and maintenance of athletic surfaces, not advertising or marketing, and the distributor/dealer role was not shown to be critical to the companies' operations.
AAO agreed with the Director's evaluation of the plagiarism evidence but found the revocation decision inadequately explained how that evidence affected eligibility for the EB-2 exceptional ability classification or the NIW.
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 with the Director's evaluation of the plagiarism evidence but found the revocation decision inadequately explained how that evidence affected eligibility for the EB-2 exceptional ability classification or the NIW.
license to practice or certification for profession
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO withdrew the Director's conclusion, finding that advertising and marketing does not require a professional license or the type of certification contemplated by the criterion. The FIFA course certificates were also dated after filing and did not relate to the advertising and marketing profession.
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, finding that advertising and marketing does not require a professional license or the type of certification contemplated by the criterion. The FIFA course certificates were also dated after filing and did not relate to the advertising and marketing profession.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions by peers or organizations
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that the client letters merely confirmed the Petitioner completed contracted work to satisfaction but did not demonstrate significant contributions to the advertising and marketing field, and that the work itself (construction/installation/maintenance of athletic surfaces) was unrelated to advertising or marketing.
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 that the client letters merely confirmed the Petitioner completed contracted work to satisfaction but did not demonstrate significant contributions to the advertising and marketing field, and that the work itself (construction/installation/maintenance of athletic surfaces) was unrelated to advertising or marketing.
AAO found the submitted certificates were not employer letters, were dated after the petition filing date, and did not describe full-time employment duties in advertising or marketing. The undated certificate also lacked probative value because it could not establish when the certification was held.
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 submitted certificates were not employer letters, were dated after the petition filing date, and did not describe full-time employment duties in advertising or marketing. The undated certificate also lacked probative value because it could not establish when the certification was held.