25 decisions

The Director found that the Beneficiary does not qualify for the classification of advanced degree professional because he does not have a foreign equivalent degree to a U.

0 • The Director concluded that the record at the time of the petition's approval did not establish the Petitioner's continuing ability to pay the Beneficiary's proffered wage.

In a decision dated December 20, 2014, the Director denied the petition on the ground that the minimum educational and experience requirements on the labor certification did not demonstrate that a master's degree or a baccalaureate degree and five years of progressively responsible experience is required to qualify for the job.

The Director found that the petitioner did not establish the beneficiary's five years of progressive post-bachelor work experience in the job offered or in an alternate occupation.

We did not, however, find the visa petition to be approvable as the record failed to establish that the beneficiary held an advanced degree in a field required by the labor certification.

As set forth in the director's December 6, 2013 denial, the primary issue is that the petitioner did not establish the beneficiary's five years of progressive work experience.

The director's decision denying the petition states that the letters submitted did not demonstrate that the beneficiary had five years of progressive experience in positions of increasing complexity and involving greater responsibility.

The director determined that the petitioner had not established that it had the continuing ability to pay the beneficiary the proffered wage beginning on the priority date of the visa petition.

However, the AAO determined that the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary possesses all the experience requirements indicated on the labor certification, with five years of qualifying progressive employment experience in the job offered.

The director further determined that because the labor certification in the instant matter would allow for the combination of education, experience, and/or training that is "equivalent" to a bachelor's degree, the labor certification did not meet the classification of an E21, a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.

The director also found that the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary possessed the required employment experience.

The director determined that the petitioner had not established that it had the continuing ability to pay the beneficiary the proffered wage beginning on the priority date of the visa petition.

The director determined that the petitioner had multiple Form 1- 140 petitions, either pending or approved but not yet adjusted, and that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate that it had the continuing ability to pay all the approved of the beneficiaries' wages beginning on the priority date of the visa petition.

The director determined that the petitioner had filed multiple petitions and that it had not established that it had the continuing ability to pay the beneficiary and the multiple beneficiaries the proffered wage amounts beginning on the priority date of the current visa petition.

As the director did not address these issues in the decision, the petition will be remanded for the director to consider the issues and enter a new decision.

Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary did not satisfy the minimum level of education stated on the labor certification.

2 Upon reviewing the petition, the acting director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary possessed the minimum .

Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary did not satisfy the minimum level of education stated on the labor certification.

· The decision will be withdrawn and the matter will be remanded to the director for further consideration.