Search cases
Compare defaults:
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52
vs
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med
Results
Showing 5901–5925 of 7923 (page 237 / 317)
MAR012022_01B5203
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. Accordingly, the issue to be dete1mined on appeal is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the reasons discussed below, we agr…
MAR012022_01D12101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, most recently entered the United States without inspection, admission, or parole in 1999. In November 2018, the Applicant filed the instant T application, asserting that she was the victim of labortraff icking. The Director denied the Tapplication concluding that the record did not establish that she was physically presen…
MAR012022_01D13101
Accepted
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
As noted above, on appeal we agreed with the Director's conclusion that, based upon the evidence of past compensation, the Petitioner had not established how it intends to compensate the Beneficiary. In its opinion and order, the court found that our decision violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb. Nat'l Cap. Presb…
MAR012022_01D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
A. Relevant Facts and Procedural History The Petitioner filed his U petition in November 2015 with a Supplement B signed and certified by the Deputy Chief of Sex Crimes for thel I State Attorney's Office in I Illinois ( certifying official). The certifying official indicated that the Petitioner was the victim of criminal activity involving Felonious Assault…
MAR012022_01D7101
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issues before us on appeal are whether the Petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) it has secured sufficient physical premises to house its new office in the United States; and (2) the Beneficiary had been employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity for at least one year in the three years preceding the filing o…
MAR012022_01F1101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The Beneficiary, a native and citizen of Zambia, was born onl 12004. The Petitioner filed a Form I-800A, Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country, on January 16, 2019, and it was approved on February 26, 2019. The Petitioner filed the instant Convention adoptee petition on behalf of the Beneficiary on July 22,…
MAR012022_01G1103
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
A. The Co-Obligor Received Notice of the Time and Place to Deliver the Foreign National The first issue on appeal is whether the Co-Obligor received notice of when and where to deliver the bonded foreign national. The ICE Field Office determined that the Co-Obligor breached a delivery bond, as the foreign national was not delivered upon request. The regulat…
MAR012022_01H2212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant merits a favorable exercise of discretion. For the following reasons, the Applicant does not merit a favorable exercise of discretion despite having established extreme hardship to his U.S. citizen spouse. 2 The burden is on the Applicant to establish that a waiver of inadmissibility is warranted in the exercise…
MAR012022_01H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant's qualifying U.S. relative would experience extreme hardship if the Applicant's waiver petition were denied. The Applicant does not contest the findings of inadmissibility for unlawful presence or for fraud or misrepresentation. 1 Both of these grounds of inadmissibility may be waived if denial of admission would…
MAR012022_01H6212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant merits a favorable exercise of discretion. For the following reasons, the Applicant does not merit a favorable exercise of discretion despite having established extreme hardship to his U.S. citizen spouse. 2 The burden is on the Applicant to establish that a waiver of inadmissibility is warranted in the exercise…
MAR012022_01H7212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant's qualifying U.S. relative would experience extreme hardship if the Applicant's waiver petition were denied. The Applicant does not contest the findings of inadmissibility for unlawful presence or for fraud or misrepresentation. 1 Both of these grounds of inadmissibility may be waived if denial of admission would…
MAR012022_02A6245
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, was approved for U-1 non immigrant status from October 2013, until October 2017. In October 2017, she filed the instant U adjustment application. Through a request for evidence (RFE), the Director informed the Applicant that the record did not contain sufficient documentation of her encounters with law enforcement and req…
MAR012022_02D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The Petitioner, a citizen of Mexico , filed the instant U petition in October 2015 . The Director denied the U petition for lack of initial required evidence, as the petition was not accompanied by a properly executed Supplement B. On appeal, the Petitioner claims, through counsel, that he submitted a properly executed Supplement B at the time of filing his…
MAR012022_02H2212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant's qualifying U.S. relative would experience extreme hardship if the Applicant's waiver petition were denied. The Applicant does not contest the findings of inadmissibility for unlawful presence or for fraud or misrepresentation. 1 Both of these grounds of inadmissibility may be waived if denial of admission would…
MAR012022_02H6212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant's qualifying U.S. relative would experience extreme hardship if the Applicant's waiver petition were denied. The Applicant does not contest the findings of inadmissibility for unlawful presence or for fraud or misrepresentation. 1 Both of these grounds of inadmissibility may be waived if denial of admission would…
MAR012022_03D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
In June 2013, the Petitioner filed her U petition, and it was approved in October 2015. The petition included a Supplement B signed and certified by a sergeant in thel !California Police Department (certifying official). In response to Part 3.1 of the Supplement B, the certifying official indicated thatthe Petitioner was the victim of criminal activity invo…
MAR012022_03H2212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Mar 01, 2022
—
In our decision dismissing the appeal we noted that the Applicant did not contest the findings of inadmissibility for unlawful presence in the United States and his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. The issues on appeal were whether the Applicant was convicted of a violent or dangerous crime, triggering the heightened discretionary standard o…
FEB282022_01A6245
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
The Applicant, a native and citizen of Honduras, was granted U non immigrant status from December 2013 until December 2017. In 2017, he filed a Form 1-539, Application to Extend/Change NonimmigrantStatus and his U nonimmigrantstatuswasextended from December2017 to December 2019, and he timely filed the instant U adjustment application in September 2019. Thr…
FEB282022_01B3203
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
The Petitioner currently employs the Beneficiary as an associate professor of pharmaceutical sciences. Prior to beginning in this position in 2019, the Beneficiary served as an associate scientist withl I She earned a Ph.D. in pharmaceutical sciences froml I University in 2018, and bachelor's and master's degrees in pharmacy from I University in India. The…
FEB282022_01B5203
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
The record indicates that Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. In his appeal brief, the Petitioner asserts that the "Dire…
FEB282022_01C1101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
In our previous decision, we explained that the Petitioner failed to submit verifiable evidence of how it intended to compensate the Beneficiary, as required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(m)(l0). The Petitioner claimed that it would provide the Beneficiary $3,000 a month or $36,000 a year in salary and housing benefits. The documentation in the record, including f…
FEB282022_01D12101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, most recently entered the United States without inspection, admission, or parole in 1999. In October 2018, the Applicant filed the instant T application, asserting that she was the victim of labor trafficking. The Director denied the T application concluding that the record did not establish that she was physically presen…
FEB282022_01D13101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
On motion, the Petitioner does not address the ground upon which we rejected the appeal. As noted, we explained in our April I 0, 2020, rejection of its appeal that "we do not have jurisdiction to review appeals of this case type." We referenced the Director's adverse decision, which, citing 8 C.F.R. § 214 .1 ( c )( 5), specified: "There is no appeal from t…
FEB282022_01D14101
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
A. Factual and Procedural History The Petitioner filed her U petition in November 2014 and, as initial evidence, submitted a Supplement B certified in June 2014 by the Senior Deputy Prosec 1 uting Attorney and Chair of the Domestic Violence Unit in thel I Prosecutor's Office in Washington (certifying official). In response to Part 3.1 of the Supplement B, w…
FEB282022_01E2309
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Feb 28, 2022
—
The issue on motion is whether the Applicant has established that our prior decision to dismiss the appeal was erroneous based on evidence of new facts or an incorrect application oflaw or policy. We conclude, upon review, that he has established neither scenario. On motion, the Applicant provides a copy of his 2020 Form 1-551 (permanent resident card), his…