PetitionLens
All decisions
SustainedEB-2 · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Education · decided 2014-08-20 · TSC · AUG202014_01B5203

Official PDF on uscis.gov

Decided under the old NYSDOT test, replaced by Matter of Dhanasar on Dec 27, 2016. Useful for background only.

How each part of the test was decided

Read from the appeals office's own sentences by fixed rules, not from the Director's findings or the petitioner's arguments. Each result shows the sentence it came from. The official PDF controls.

  • Step 0Eligible for EB-2Not decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

The decision in brief

Sentences picked out of the text automatically. Read them in context below; the official PDF controls.

What the AAO decided

  • Accordingly, the petition is approved under section 203(b )(2) of the Act, 8 U.S. C. § 1153(b )(2), for classification of the beneficiary as an advanced degree professional. See in text
  • ORDER: The appeal is sustained. See in text
  • The petition is approved. See in text

Main reasons given

  • Upon review of the entire record, the AAO concludes that the petitioner has established that the beneficiary more likely than not had all the education, training, and experience specified on the ETA See in text
  • The AAO also determines that the petitioner has established its continuing ability to pay the proffered wage :from the priority date up to the present. See in text
Read the full decision (2 pages)

Objections found (0)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

No catalog objection was detected in the analysis section.

    Full decision

    OCR text from the official PDF, reformatted for reading. Scan errors carry over; the PDF controls.

    Highlighted: Outcome (4) AAO finding (2)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    DATE: AUG 2 0 2014 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER · INRE: Petitioner: · Beneficiary: U.S. DepartmentofHomeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 Washington, DC 20529-2090 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services FILE: · PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced

    Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)

    ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:

    INSTRUCTIONS:

    Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. This is a non­ precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy through non-precedent decisions.

    Ron Rosenberg

    Chief, Administrative Appeals Office

    -www. uscis.gov

    NON-PRECEDENT DECISION

    DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center (Director). It is now on appeal before the Chief, Administrative Appeals Office (AAO). The appeal will be sustained, and the petition approved.

    The petitioner is a telecommunications company. It seeks to permanently employ the beneficiary in the United States as an "Engineer - Services RF" pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). As required by statute, the petition is accompanied by an ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent Employment Certification, approved by the United States Department of Labor (DOL).

    The Director denied the petition on November 20, 2013, on the ground that the record failed to establish that the beneficiary had two years of qualifying experience, in conformance with the labor certification.

    The petitioner filed a timely appeal, accompanied by additional evidence of the beneficiary's work experience. The AAO conducts appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004).

    Section 203(b )(2) of the Act provides for the granting of preference classification to members of the professions holding advanced degrees whose services are sought by employers in the United States. To be eligible for approval, a beneficiary must have all the education, training, and experience specified on the labor certification as of the petition's priority date. See Matter of Wing's Tea House, 16 I&N 158 (Act. Reg. Comm. 1977). The petitioner must also establish its continuing ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary from the priority date up to the present. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2). The priority date of the instant petition is October 4, 2012, which is the date the underlying labor certification was accepted for processing by the DOL. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(d). The Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form 1-140) was filed on March 14, 2013.

    Upon review of the entire record, the AAO concludes that the petitioner has established that the beneficiary more likely than not had all the education, training, and experience specified on the ETA

    Form 9089 as of the priority date. The AAO also determines that the petitioner has established its continuing ability to pay the proffered wage :from the priority date up to the present. Accordingly, the petition is approved under section 203(b )(2) of the Act, 8 U.S. C. § 1153(b )(2), for classification of the beneficiary as an advanced degree professional.

    The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. See section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361 (2012); Matter of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). That burden has been met in this action.

    ORDER: The appeal is sustained. The petition is approved.