AAO found the Petitioner described only general nursing, healthcare management, and professorial duties without specifying the concrete impact of her particular endeavor on the field or nation.…
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 described only general nursing, healthcare management, and professorial duties without specifying the concrete impact of her particular endeavor on the field or nation. Citing Dhanasar, AAO noted that the importance of nursing as a profession does not automatically render every nursing position nationally important, and the Petitioner failed to show how her individual employment would resolve or materially impact national shortages or have broader field-level effects.
AAO found the letter from the chief operating officer qualifies as a statement from 'a financial officer' under the regulation and, combined with the W-2s and earnings statements showing wages at or above the proffered level, the Petitioner established ability to pay by a preponderance of the evidence.
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 letter from the chief operating officer qualifies as a statement from 'a financial officer' under the regulation and, combined with the W-2s and earnings statements showing wages at or above the proffered level, the Petitioner established ability to pay by a preponderance of the evidence.
AAO found the Petitioner's foreign degree was equivalent only to 3.5 years of U.S. study, and combined with the 2020 postgraduate certificate could not yield 5 years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience by the August 2021 filing date.
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's foreign degree was equivalent only to 3.5 years of U.S. study, and combined with the 2020 postgraduate certificate could not yield 5 years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience by the August 2021 filing date.
AAO found that national importance must be assessed based on the specific endeavor proposed at the time of filing—working as a self-employed financial specialist subcontractor—not on the importance of the financial industry generally. The record does not show how this endeavor has national or global implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other 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 +
AAO found that national importance must be assessed based on the specific endeavor proposed at the time of filing—working as a self-employed financial specialist subcontractor—not on the importance of the financial industry generally. The record does not show how this endeavor has national or global implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects. The RFE-introduced business plan and related assertions represented a new set of facts constituting an impermissible material change.
The AAO agreed the endeavor lacked national importance. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of graphic designers and the graphic design industry broadly, not the national importance of his specific endeavor of operating his business. The expert letter made the same error.…
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 AAO agreed the endeavor lacked national importance. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of graphic designers and the graphic design industry broadly, not the national importance of his specific endeavor of operating his business. The expert letter made the same error. Revenue projections ($388K–$1.698M over five years) and employment projections (3–12 jobs) did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at the regional or national level commensurate with national importance.
The Petitioner did not challenge on appeal the Director's conclusion that she failed to satisfy at least three of the six exceptional-ability 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 +
The Petitioner did not challenge on appeal the Director's conclusion that she failed to satisfy at least three of the six exceptional-ability criteria.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's statement contained generic descriptions of HR manager duties without details specific to her endeavor, and that working for a single U.S. company would not have broader implications for the HR field. The new business plan submitted on appeal was not considered because it constituted both untimely evidence and a material change in 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 agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's statement contained generic descriptions of HR manager duties without details specific to her endeavor, and that working for a single U.S. company would not have broader implications for the HR field. The new business plan submitted on appeal was not considered because it constituted both untimely evidence and a material change in endeavor.