All Cases

The AAO determined that a petitioner is not required to currently employ a beneficiary, only to show intent for prospective employment once permanent residency is granted. Evidence regarding the relationship between the non-profit healthcare system and its subsidiary satisfied the preponderance of evidence standard for a bona fide job offer.

The appeal was sustained because a preponderance of evidence demonstrated that the Beneficiary's graduate field of environmental health sciences relates to the job's acceptable degree discipline of statistics. This conclusion was supported by curriculum overlap in data analysis and statistical programming, satisfying the educational requirements for the EB-3 professional category.

The Director denied the petition due to the Petitioner's failure to demonstrate its ability to pay the proffered wage. The AAO sustained the appeal, determining that the Petitioner met the regulatory requirements by paying the Beneficiary $92,400 in 2022, which exceeded the $85,842 annual proffered wage, and by submitting its 2022 federal income tax return as required evidence.

The Director's denial was based on the interpretation that the Beneficiary's foreign degree was a professional license, not a bachelor's equivalent, citing EDGE. The AAO, upon de novo review, found that the Beneficiary's degree, completed over four years of university study (ten trimesters) and supported by an independent academic credentials report equating to 132 credit hours, met the labor certification's requirement of a bachelor's degree in 'any academic major field' and the regulatory definition of a professional.

The appeal was sustained because the Petitioner provided sufficient financial documentation, including annual reports and SEC filings, to prove it could cover the proffered wage from the priority date. Since the Beneficiary was already being paid above the proffered wage, the Petitioner did not need to further demonstrate the ability to pay combined wages for multiple petitions under specific policy guidelines. The 2022 and 2023 annual reports reflected net income far exceeding the required amounts.

The appeal was sustained because the job's requirement of an associate's degree counts as two years of training, which, combined with the six months of required experience, meets the EB-3 skilled worker threshold of at least two years of training or experience. The Beneficiary's qualifications were verified to meet and exceed these requirements as of the priority date.

The appeal was sustained because the Petitioner demonstrated compliance with 20 C.F.R. § 656.10(d)(3)(iv) by posting the NOF for at least 10 consecutive business days within the 30-to-180-day window before filing. The AAO determined the Director erred in the calculation of the required notice period. The evidence showed the notice was clearly visible and met all technical Department of Labor requirements for professional nurses.

The AAO determined the Director erred in rejecting a 2023 employment letter simply because it was dated after the filing; the letter validly documented experience gained before the priority date. The evidence established the Beneficiary had over four years of experience including the specific materials required by the labor certification. Consequently, the Petitioner met the burden of proof for the EB-3 skilled worker classification.

The appeal was sustained because a preponderance of evidence established the Petitioner's intent to pay the required prevailing wage. The Petitioner successfully amended the filing and provided a credible explanation for the initial clerical error regarding the salary.

The appeal was sustained based on the 'Sonegawa' totality of circumstances test, which considers factors like business longevity, size of operations, and industry reputation. The Petitioner demonstrated it was an established international payment processor with the capacity to pay the proffered wage despite a temporary shortfall in 2017.