All Cases

The Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary's qualifying experience of four years in consumer marketing and sales in the fashion jewelry industry by the priority date of March 24, 2016. Business registration documents provided did not corroborate job duties or specific employment dates, and inconsistencies in the Beneficiary's work history remained unresolved.

The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to state new facts or provide new documentary evidence, merely resubmitting existing records. The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner did not identify any specific error of law or policy in the prior appellate decision.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to resolve inconsistencies regarding the Beneficiary's work history with independent objective evidence. Consequently, the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary possessed the required 24 months of experience as a jewelry repairer. While findings of willful misrepresentation and the invalidation of the labor certification were withdrawn, the lack of proven qualifications warranted the denial.