leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with distinguished reputation
裁决如何说明
AAO found the Director's 'entire organization' requirement to be incorrect per USCIS Policy Manual, which explicitly allows a leading or critical role for a division or department. AAO also found it improper to evaluate sustained acclaim at step-1, and remanded for re-evaluation.
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 Director's 'entire organization' requirement to be incorrect per USCIS Policy Manual, which explicitly allows a leading or critical role for a division or department. AAO also found it improper to evaluate sustained acclaim at step-1, and remanded for re-evaluation.
AAO agreed with the Petitioner that the Director conflated step-1 and step-2 analysis under Kazarian by requiring the judging evidence to show sustained acclaim, and remanded for re-evaluation under the plain language of the criterion.
为什么值得参考
了解评审邀请、已完成任务及评审性质如何被记录和衡量。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO agreed with the Petitioner that the Director conflated step-1 and step-2 analysis under Kazarian by requiring the judging evidence to show sustained acclaim, and remanded for re-evaluation under the plain language of the criterion.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
裁决如何说明
AAO found the Director erred by improperly discounting the translator-certified award certificate and by imposing a non-existent 'major media' requirement for supporting articles. AAO reserved the ultimate determination and remanded for re-evaluation.
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 Director erred by improperly discounting the translator-certified award certificate and by imposing a non-existent 'major media' requirement for supporting articles. AAO reserved the ultimate determination and remanded for re-evaluation.
AAO agreed the Petitioner failed prong 1, additionally faulting the inconsistency between his sales-manager and CEO/entrepreneur endeavors and the lack of evidence tying his work to broader economic 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 agreed the Petitioner failed prong 1, additionally faulting the inconsistency between his sales-manager and CEO/entrepreneur endeavors and the lack of evidence tying his work to broader economic impact.
AAO disagreed because the record contained no academic credentials evaluation showing the foreign Brazilian bachelor's degree and MBA certificate were equivalent to a U.S. advanced 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 disagreed because the record contained no academic credentials evaluation showing the foreign Brazilian bachelor's degree and MBA certificate were equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree.
AAO agreed the Petitioner's proposed IT consulting endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance. The expert letter addressed only the general importance of the IT industry, not the specific proposed 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 the Petitioner's proposed IT consulting endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance. The expert letter addressed only the general importance of the IT industry, not the specific proposed endeavor. The business plan's revenue and staffing projections were unsupported, and the Petitioner failed to show the endeavor's impact would extend beyond his company and its clients to the broader field or economy. Geographic errors in the business plan also raised plausibility concerns.
AAO found substantial merit established after reviewing the updated professional plan describing specific goals at the Petitioner's employer. However, national importance was not established because the Petitioner's endeavor did not extend beyond her current employer, the recommendation and expert letters addressed her individual skills rather than broader impact, and research reports about the importance of business profes…
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 substantial merit established after reviewing the updated professional plan describing specific goals at the Petitioner's employer. However, national importance was not established because the Petitioner's endeavor did not extend beyond her current employer, the recommendation and expert letters addressed her individual skills rather than broader impact, and research reports about the importance of business professionals do not show national importance of her specific endeavor.
The Petitioner's foreign degree is only a bachelor's equivalent, not above it. Her post-baccalaureate experience amounts to roughly nine months at one employer and six months at another, far short of the required five progressive years. The associate degree does not qualify as an advanced degree above her bachelor's.
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's foreign degree is only a bachelor's equivalent, not above it. Her post-baccalaureate experience amounts to roughly nine months at one employer and six months at another, far short of the required five progressive years. The associate degree does not qualify as an advanced degree above her bachelor's.
AAO noted that the Petitioner's education, skills, knowledge, and experience relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework but did not make a finding on this prong because the first prong was not met and the matter was resolved on that basis.
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 noted that the Petitioner's education, skills, knowledge, and experience relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework but did not make a finding on this prong because the first prong was not met and the matter was resolved on that basis.