All Cases

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not demonstrate the ability to pay the proffered wage through required evidence (annual reports, tax returns, or audited financial statements). The 2022 tax return showed insufficient net income and net current assets, while the internal financial reports were unaudited and contained material inconsistencies that were not resolved with objective evidence.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not remedy documentary deficiencies identified in the RFE, specifically regarding incomplete translation certifications and employer letters lacking the writer's address. Furthermore, the Petitioner failed to provide enough consistent evidence and information to establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a primarily managerial capacity in the U.S., citing a vague job description and conflicting organizational charts.

The Petitioner failed to provide valid certified English translations for foreign language documents as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(iii). The motion to reopen did not state new facts or provide new documentary evidence, and the motion to reconsider failed to establish an incorrect application of law or policy in the prior decision.