30 decisions

The Director concluded that the Petitioner did not demonstrate its required ability to pay the combined proffered wages of this and other Form 1-140 petitions.

The Director found that the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not established that a waiver of a job offer would be in the national interest.

Because the record at the time of the NOIR's issuance did not establish the bona fides of the job opportunity or the validity of the accompanying labor certification, the Director properly issued the NOIR.

Invalidation of the Labor Certification The Director invalidated the labor certification and denied the petition after concluding that the record did not establish that the Petitioner had extended a valid full-time offer of employment to the Beneficiary.

28, 2013) (finding that an employer did not establish a bona fide job opportunity where the beneficiary was the cousin of three shareholders, including two majority shareholders who made all of the employer's hiring decisions); Matter of Dr.

The director found that the petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that the petitioner has not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United States.

The director's decision concluded that the proffered position's minimum education and experience requirements did not meet the standard for classification as an advanced degree professional.

The director's certified decision denied the petition, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary possessed a U.

The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition concluding that the beneficiary 1) does not qualify as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, (2) that the petitioner had not established its ability to pay the beneficiary's wage and (3) that the petitioner had not established that the offered position constitutes permanent employment.

The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition concluding that the beneficiary 1) does not qualify as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, (2) that the petitioner had not established its ability to pay the beneficiary's wage and (3) that the petitioner had not established that the offered position constitutes permanent employment.

Nevertheless, the record does not establish that the petitioner · did not intend to employ the beneficiary at the time of filing the application for labor certificCJ.

The director found that the petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions with the equivalent of an advanced degree but that the petitioner had not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United States.

Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary did not satisfy the minimum education requirements stated oil the labotcettification.

If the petitioner does not establish that it employed and paid the beneficiary an aJ,llount at least equal to the proffered wage during that period, users will next examine the net income figure reflected on the petitioner's federal income tax return, without consideration of depreciation or other expenses.

The director revoked the approval of the petition after concluding that the record did not establish that the benericiary was qualified for the offered position and that the labor certification was gained through fra11d or willful misrepresentation of a material fact.

Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position with a minimum of a bachelor's degree in public relations, English or journalism and 60 months (five years) of qualifying employment yxperience.

The director determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a continuing ability to pay the proffered wage beginning on the priority date.

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.