Qualifying employment experience per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found, sua sponte, that the record does not establish the Beneficiary's qualifying experience because her resume lists job titles inconsistent with the labor certification requirement, omits job duties, and suggests part-time work in simultaneous positions. AAO remanded for the Director to notify the Petitioner of these deficiencies.
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, sua sponte, that the record does not establish the Beneficiary's qualifying experience because her resume lists job titles inconsistent with the labor certification requirement, omits job duties, and suggests part-time work in simultaneous positions. AAO remanded for the Director to notify the Petitioner of these deficiencies.
AAO reserved the formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the initial evidence threshold, but noted in passing that the record does not establish the required acclaim.
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 the formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the initial evidence threshold, but noted in passing that the record does not establish the required acclaim.
Required U.S. bachelor's degree per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
USCIS must read and apply the plain language of the labor certification. Part H.9 unambiguously excludes foreign educational equivalents, and the record lacks evidence that the Beneficiary holds a U.S. bachelor's degree. USCIS lacks authority to amend a DOL form; the Petitioner must seek correction from DOL directly.
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 +
USCIS must read and apply the plain language of the labor certification. Part H.9 unambiguously excludes foreign educational equivalents, and the record lacks evidence that the Beneficiary holds a U.S. bachelor's degree. USCIS lacks authority to amend a DOL form; the Petitioner must seek correction from DOL directly.
Required seven years of qualifying employment experience per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner has not sufficiently established approximately two years of claimed qualifying experience (July 2018 to June 2020) because: (1) the letter for the second insurance company period was authored by a purported former co-worker, not the employer, and no unavailability was shown; and (2) a letter for the first insurance company period shows a name discrepancy on the letterhead.…
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 sufficiently established approximately two years of claimed qualifying experience (July 2018 to June 2020) because: (1) the letter for the second insurance company period was authored by a purported former co-worker, not the employer, and no unavailability was shown; and (2) a letter for the first insurance company period shows a name discrepancy on the letterhead. Without adequate proof of those two years, the required seven years of experience is unmet.
Required seven years of experience with specified technological skills per labor certification
AAO 为什么未被说服
The labor certification requires seven years of experience with each of five designated technological skills. Although all employment letters reference the Beneficiary's experience with those skills, none specify the duration of experience with each skill. The Director had not notified the Petitioner of this deficiency, so the Petitioner must address it in future filings.
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 labor certification requires seven years of experience with each of five designated technological skills. Although all employment letters reference the Beneficiary's experience with those skills, none specify the duration of experience with each skill. The Director had not notified the Petitioner of this deficiency, so the Petitioner must address it in future filings.
AAO found the record insufficient to establish advanced degree equivalency because the Petitioner's foreign bachelor's degree is in mechanical engineering — unrelated to the proposed business administration endeavor — and the regulations do not allow combining an unrelated bachelor's degree with a post-graduate certificate in a related field to satisfy the advanced degree equivalency requirement.
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 record insufficient to establish advanced degree equivalency because the Petitioner's foreign bachelor's degree is in mechanical engineering — unrelated to the proposed business administration endeavor — and the regulations do not allow combining an unrelated bachelor's degree with a post-graduate certificate in a related field to satisfy the advanced degree equivalency requirement.
AAO agreed with the Director, finding that while the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, the Petitioner failed to show that it would impact the field broadly or generate substantial positive economic effects nationally.…
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, finding that while the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, the Petitioner failed to show that it would impact the field broadly or generate substantial positive economic effects nationally. The expert's claims about addressing professional shortages, creating jobs, and spurring economic growth were found unpersuasive because they addressed the importance of the profession rather than the specific proposed endeavor, and lacked sufficient corroboration.
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that one set of SimilarWeb statistics applied to the wrong website (champion.com rather than champion.com.ua), and for the remaining two websites, the record failed to contextualize the ranking and traffic statistics to show the sites constitute major media—particularly by explaining how a predominantly Ukrainian audience of any given size is significant enough.
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 one set of SimilarWeb statistics applied to the wrong website (champion.com rather than champion.com.ua), and for the remaining two websites, the record failed to contextualize the ranking and traffic statistics to show the sites constitute major media—particularly by explaining how a predominantly Ukrainian audience of any given size is significant enough.