AAO withdrew the Director's substantial merit determination, finding the endeavor (training in radio journalism/entrepreneurship) has merit. However, AAO agreed the endeavor lacks national importance because the evidence (unrelated marketing printouts, untranslated articles, generic statistics) failed to show prospective impact beyond direct trainees or 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 withdrew the Director's substantial merit determination, finding the endeavor (training in radio journalism/entrepreneurship) has merit. However, AAO agreed the endeavor lacks national importance because the evidence (unrelated marketing printouts, untranslated articles, generic statistics) failed to show prospective impact beyond direct trainees or substantial positive economic effects.
AAO acknowledged petitioner's education and experience as a customs official but found the record lacked evidence of entrepreneurial experience, a business plan, progress toward startup, or interest from potential customers or investors. Evidence of awards and reviewer service was not submitted with the petition. The record as a whole did not show petitioner was well positioned to advance his proposed entrepreneurial endeavor.
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 acknowledged petitioner's education and experience as a customs official but found the record lacked evidence of entrepreneurial experience, a business plan, progress toward startup, or interest from potential customers or investors. Evidence of awards and reviewer service was not submitted with the petition. The record as a whole did not show petitioner was well positioned to advance his proposed entrepreneurial endeavor.
Although AAO disagreed with the Director's reasoning (faulting reliance on petitioner's employment status and characterization of his statement), AAO independently found that the record contained no evidence to support the broad assertions made and no evidence of the potential prospective impact of the proposed endeavor, and the petitioner failed to show how operating a consulting firm would impact the import/export industr…
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 +
Although AAO disagreed with the Director's reasoning (faulting reliance on petitioner's employment status and characterization of his statement), AAO independently found that the record contained no evidence to support the broad assertions made and no evidence of the potential prospective impact of the proposed endeavor, and the petitioner failed to show how operating a consulting firm would impact the import/export industry or U.S. economy at a national level.
Original contributions of major significance in the field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO found that originality and major significance are two separate elements; showing a work is original does not establish that it is of major significance. The evidence shows influence on individuals in the music industry but does not rise to a level of major significance in the field as a whole.
为什么值得参考
区分“工作具有原创性”与“原创贡献对整个领域具有重大意义”的证明。
查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found that originality and major significance are two separate elements; showing a work is original does not establish that it is of major significance. The evidence shows influence on individuals in the music industry but does not rise to a level of major significance in the field as a whole.
Five years of progressive experience in the specialty following qualifying degree
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO identified multiple unresolved discrepancies: the evaluation shows concurrent employment from January 2012 to February 2014 raising full-time questions; employment prior to the July 2011 degree is inapplicable; and the employer letter conflicts with the evaluation regarding job titles and dates, and does not confirm full-time status.
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 identified multiple unresolved discrepancies: the evaluation shows concurrent employment from January 2012 to February 2014 raising full-time questions; employment prior to the July 2011 degree is inapplicable; and the employer letter conflicts with the evaluation regarding job titles and dates, and does not confirm full-time status.
AAO noted the evaluation addresses the Petitioner's degree in social communication, which appears dissimilar to business administration, the focus of the proposed endeavor. The transcript lists many courses unrelated to business administration, including art, language, philosophy, anthropology, and culture.
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 noted the evaluation addresses the Petitioner's degree in social communication, which appears dissimilar to business administration, the focus of the proposed endeavor. The transcript lists many courses unrelated to business administration, including art, language, philosophy, anthropology, and culture.
beneficiary's 60 months of qualifying management-analyst experience
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO accepts that the FEIN discrepancy is resolved but finds the vendor-based explanation for the two divergent 2009 W-2s contradicted by the chandlery's own 2009 monthly pay statements (which bear no vendor name and total the higher amount), and finds that the post-move address appearing on early-2009 pay statements suggests they were not contemporaneous.
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 accepts that the FEIN discrepancy is resolved but finds the vendor-based explanation for the two divergent 2009 W-2s contradicted by the chandlery's own 2009 monthly pay statements (which bear no vendor name and total the higher amount), and finds that the post-move address appearing on early-2009 pay statements suggests they were not contemporaneous.
labor certification demonstrates job requires an advanced degree professional
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO finds H.14's plain language unambiguous and limited to combinations evaluated by a professional evaluation service, which can include sub-baccalaureate combinations not qualifying for EB-2; SnapNames is not binding and in any event applies only when language is ambiguous and to skilled-worker (not advanced-degree-professional) cases; Rosedale and Madany support, not undermine, plain-language interpretation; the H.9 indi…
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 finds H.14's plain language unambiguous and limited to combinations evaluated by a professional evaluation service, which can include sub-baccalaureate combinations not qualifying for EB-2; SnapNames is not binding and in any event applies only when language is ambiguous and to skilled-worker (not advanced-degree-professional) cases; Rosedale and Madany support, not undermine, plain-language interpretation; the H.9 indication already covers foreign bachelor's-equivalent degrees, rendering the petitioner's intent reading redundant; and Federal Insurance did not eliminate the Kellogg-language regulatory requirement, leaving petitioner's shifting rationales unresolved under Matter of Ho.
Leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO reaffirmed its prior finding. The Petitioner merely reasserted prior arguments without identifying a law or USCIS policy inconsistent with AAO's prior analysis.
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 reaffirmed its prior finding. The Petitioner merely reasserted prior arguments without identifying a law or USCIS policy inconsistent with AAO's prior analysis.