advanced degree or equivalent (bachelor's + 5 years progressive experience)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner holds only a bachelor's degree equivalent, not a degree above a bachelor's. He received his bachelor's in 2018 and filed in May 2020, leaving fewer than five years of post-bachelor's progressive experience. Pre-bachelor's experience cannot be credited under the regulation.
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 holds only a bachelor's degree equivalent, not a degree above a bachelor's. He received his bachelor's in 2018 and filed in May 2020, leaving fewer than five years of post-bachelor's progressive experience. Pre-bachelor's experience cannot be credited under the regulation.
professional association membership (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AOPA provides insurance-like coverage options and is open to aircraft owners regardless of profession, so it does not qualify as a professional association within the meaning of the 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 +
AOPA provides insurance-like coverage options and is open to aircraft owners regardless of profession, so it does not qualify as a professional association within the meaning of the criterion.
AAO found the record rife with unresolved inconsistencies regarding the nature of the proposed endeavor (shifting between supporting a prior employer, running a catering company, and financial consulting), implausible employment projections operating from a private residence, materially conflicting business plan figures, and the Petitioner's new characterization of her company on appeal as a financial consulting firm, which…
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 record rife with unresolved inconsistencies regarding the nature of the proposed endeavor (shifting between supporting a prior employer, running a catering company, and financial consulting), implausible employment projections operating from a private residence, materially conflicting business plan figures, and the Petitioner's new characterization of her company on appeal as a financial consulting firm, which constituted new facts that could not establish eligibility. Industry reports and prior work experience were misplaced evidence for the first prong. The proposed endeavor appeared to benefit only the Petitioner and her clients, not the nation.
final merits determination for exceptional ability
AAO 为什么未被说服
Although AAO indicated a final merits determination was unnecessary, it advised in the alternative that the record in the aggregate did not support a finding that the Petitioner possesses the degree of expertise required for exceptional ability classification.
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 +
Although AAO indicated a final merits determination was unnecessary, it advised in the alternative that the record in the aggregate did not support a finding that the Petitioner possesses the degree of expertise required for exceptional ability classification.
salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(D))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found no evidence of prior earnings or comparative salary data, and noted the Russian tax filings submitted on appeal did not reflect salary or remuneration.
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 no evidence of prior earnings or comparative salary data, and noted the Russian tax filings submitted on appeal did not reflect salary or remuneration.
membership in professional associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed that because the membership post-dated filing, the criterion was not satisfied, and it was unnecessary to determine whether OOIDA qualifies as a professional association.
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 that because the membership post-dated filing, the criterion was not satisfied, and it was unnecessary to determine whether OOIDA qualifies as a professional association.
ten years full-time experience (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed the self-authored letter was insufficient and noted the supporting evidence did not identify the nature of the business, and the tax filings covered only six years and lacked financial detail establishing full-time activity for ten years.
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 the self-authored letter was insufficient and noted the supporting evidence did not identify the nature of the business, and the tax filings covered only six years and lacked financial detail establishing full-time activity for ten years.
license to practice the profession (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(C))
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed the CDL post-dated filing by more than 18 months and could not establish eligibility at the time of filing, and that the Petitioner's unsupported assertions about other licenses were uncorroborated.
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 the CDL post-dated filing by more than 18 months and could not establish eligibility at the time of filing, and that the Petitioner's unsupported assertions about other licenses were uncorroborated.
recognition for achievements and significant contributions (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
裁决如何说明
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the threshold requirement of meeting at least three criteria, making analysis of this one unnecessary.
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 reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy the threshold requirement of meeting at least three criteria, making analysis of this one unnecessary.
The employment letters, considered with other evidence of employment history, established at least ten years of full-time experience in the hotel industry.
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 employment letters, considered with other evidence of employment history, established at least ten years of full-time experience in the hotel industry.