PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
SustainedEB-2 · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Other / unclear · decided 2014-11-18 · TSC · NOV182014_02B5203

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

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)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    DATE: NOV 1 8 2014 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER · IN RE: Petitioner : · Beneficiary: U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigr ation Service ~ Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 20 Mass achusetts 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 PETITION ER:

    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.

    Thank you,

    ~/ ~/ ~~sen berg

    Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov

    NON-PRECEDENT DECISION

    DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The director's decision will be withdrawn. We will sustain the appeal and approve the petition.

    The petitioner is a computer software company. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United States as an associate product manager, per section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2), which provides immigrant classification to members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent and whose services are sought by an employer in the United States. As required by statute, an ETA Form 9089, Application for Alien Employment Certification approved by the Department of Labor (DOL), accompanied the petition. Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that it had the ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date of March 28, 2013 onwards. The record lacked the petitioner's 2013 federal income tax return, which was unavailable at the time that the petition was filed. On appeal and in response to our Request for Evidence (RFE), the petitioner submitted its 2013 federal income tax return, which establishes that the petitioner has the ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date onwards. Thus, the appeal will be sustained and the petition will be approved.

    The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has met that burden.

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