EB1 Law Review AAO – December 23 2011 – Invited Membership vs. Memberships
EB1 Law Review by Law Offices of Chris M. Ingram
Invited Membership vs. Memberships
In our pursuit of EB1 Green Card and O1 Visa legal excellence we are systematically reviewing every Administrative Appeal Office decision that has been appealed. These cases are not our cases but any and all cases that have been appealed nationally. In continuously reviewing these decisions and learning from them we will continue to be the recognized leaders in EB1 Green Card and O1 Visa legal field as we continue preparing successful cases for aliens of extraordinary ability.
AAO Decision December, 23 2011 – Invited Membership vs. Memberships, et .al (p8-9)
Source Case
Invited Membership vs. Memberships – (December, 23 2011 p8-9)
Evidence of Eligibility: 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h) (3)
(ii) Documentation of the alien’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields;
December 23 2011 – Invited Membership vs. Memberships, et .al (p 8 – 9)
Context
The Petitioner at the time of filing was employed as an "Information Systems Analyst 2", submitted evidence regarding her membership in an association.
While the AAO discussed its reasons why this association did not meet the criteria, it went on to discuss when regulations are worded in the plural. This discussion was also referenced in the discussion regarding the leading and critical role category.
AAO Discussion:
1: In regard to the Membership category, the plain language requires “membership in associations” in the plural. This use of plural is consistent with the requirements for extensive evidence.
2: Not all of the criteria are worded in the plural, and Judging (iv) and High Salary (ix) only require service in a single instance.
3: When a regulatory criterion wishes to include the singular within the plural, as it does so in Memberships (ii), the AAO can infer that the plural in the criteria has meaning.
4: Federal Courts have upheld USCIS’ ability to interpret significance from whether the singular or plural is used in regulations (Maramjaya v. USCIS, Civ. Act. No 06-2158; Snapnames.com Inc v. Chertoff, 2006 WL 3491005)
Conclusion
USCIS is given the authority by the Federal Courts to interpret the significance of whether a singular or plural is used in regulations. Though certain regulations do not require multiple instances to satisfy the category, if the plural is mixed with the singular, AAO will give meaning to the plural in the criteria.
*Cases Cited
Maramjaya v. USCIS, Civ. Act. No 06-2158
Snapnames.com Inc v. Chertoff, 2006 WL 3491005
Important Notice: Please note that all videos created by the Law Offices of Chris M. Ingram are intended as general information only and not specific legal advice pertaining your case. If you would like specific legal advice on any immigration matter please do not hesitate to contact this law office accordingly. All pictorial images used in these videos and the website in general are licensed stocked images and not portraits, or otherwise, of anyone from the Law Offices of Chris M. Ingram, nor of its clients unless otherwise indicated by name. All images are used solely for illustrative purposes only. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2014