EB1 Law Review AAO – December 23 2011 – Evidentiary Requirements for Establishing High Remuneration

EB1 Law Review by Law Offices of Chris M. Ingram 

Evidentiary Requirements for Establishing High Remuneration

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. 

Evidence of Eligibility: 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h) (3)

(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field;

Context

When it comes to submitting evidence to establish high salary the Petitioner is required to follow a specific protocol if the submission is to succeed.

AAO Discussion

The AAO outlined the following flaws in the Petitioner’s argument of this category:

1: The Petitioner submitted updated salary information with her Appeal, however, the AAO could not consider this evidence because eligibility must be established as the time of filing.

The AAO will not consider any salary increases received by the Petitioner after the original date of filing.

2: Though the Petitioner submitted occupational wage data for Network and Computer Systems Administrators, the AAO determined that the Petitioner’s job title corresponded more closely with Computer Systems Analysts or Network Systems and Data Communications Analysts. The salary data for a Computer Systems Analysts was above that of the stated salary of the Petitioner, which the AAO considered.

3: Even if the AAO had accepted the Petitioner’s job title as a Network and Computer Systems Administrator, she must show her salary is high in relation to others in her field.

In this case the Petitioner submitted only local wage data from her metropolitan area, which the AAO deemed this as inappropriate for comparison to demonstrate her earnings were high in relation to others in the field, the implication being that salary must be compared nationally.

*Cases Cited

Matter of Katigback, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg’l Comm’r 1971) – Eligibility must be established at the time of filing.

Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dem. 953, 954 (Assoc. Comm’r 1994) – In relation to high salary not locally but nationally.

Grimson v. INS, 934 F. Supp. 965, 968 (N.D. Ill. 1996) – Considering Pro Golfer’s earnings against other PGA golfers.

Muni v. INS, 891 F. Supp. 440, 444-45 (N.D. Ill. 1995)

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