membership in professional associations (criterion E)
AAO 为什么未被说服
The Petitioner submitted a professional ID card and certificate of current professional status from Brazilian administration councils, but provided no supporting evidence such as membership requirements or by-laws to establish that these councils are professional associations rather than government agencies. Without such evidence, the criterion is not met.
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 submitted a professional ID card and certificate of current professional status from Brazilian administration councils, but provided no supporting evidence such as membership requirements or by-laws to establish that these councils are professional associations rather than government agencies. Without such evidence, the criterion is not met.
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree but that without employer letters, the submitted evidence cannot establish the required progressive experience.…
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 with the Director that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree but that without employer letters, the submitted evidence cannot establish the required progressive experience. AAO further noted that the credential evaluator relied only on diplomas, transcripts, and resume — not employment letters — and that the basis for statements about the Petitioner's professional responsibilities was not established.
AAO agreed with the Director that the petitioner failed to identify a specific, consistent proposed endeavor and that her evidence showed impact limited to individual clients and companies rather than broader national importance. The expert evaluation was discounted because it mirrored counsel's brief and lacked specific analysis of the petitioner's 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 failed to identify a specific, consistent proposed endeavor and that her evidence showed impact limited to individual clients and companies rather than broader national importance. The expert evaluation was discounted because it mirrored counsel's brief and lacked specific analysis of the petitioner's endeavor.
AAO found the credential evaluation used a template with conclusory statements, lacked independent analysis of course hours and grading, and failed to explain how 3,908 workload hours map to U.S. credit hours. Work experience evidence was also insufficient because some experience predated the degree and letters lacked sufficient detail.
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 credential evaluation used a template with conclusory statements, lacked independent analysis of course hours and grading, and failed to explain how 3,908 workload hours map to U.S. credit hours. Work experience evidence was also insufficient because some experience predated the degree and letters lacked sufficient detail.
AAO finds the academic record deficient and the credentials evaluation unreliable, so the Petitioner has not shown she holds the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience.
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 the academic record deficient and the credentials evaluation unreliable, so the Petitioner has not shown she holds the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience.
membership in professional associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))
AAO 为什么未被说服
Without membership requirements or by-laws showing the union qualifies as a professional association, the affiliation certificate does not satisfy criterion (E).
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 +
Without membership requirements or by-laws showing the union qualifies as a professional association, the affiliation certificate does not satisfy criterion (E).
high salary or significantly high remuneration in relation to others in the field
AAO 为什么未被说服
AAO agreed with the Director that the accountant's letter does not provide enough information. The figures do not directly document the Petitioner's income, specify the services performed, identify any source for the average income of 'other artists,' or show that the comparative figures relate to individuals performing similar work.…
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 with the Director that the accountant's letter does not provide enough information. The figures do not directly document the Petitioner's income, specify the services performed, identify any source for the average income of 'other artists,' or show that the comparative figures relate to individuals performing similar work. Additionally, the letter compared the Petitioner as an 'architect-artist' to 'other artists' rather than comparable professionals.