业务拓展专员 · EB-3 职业移民：发回重审（2024年4月25日）

案件背景

申请人是一家提供运动训练和教育服务的青少年高尔夫学院，拟以第三优先职业移民专业人员类别为受益人申请永久居民身份，职位为业务拓展专员；受益人当时持H-1B非移民身份为该申请人工作。

审理经过

1. 初次提交

   申请人提交I-140专业人员申请，拟雇用受益人为业务拓展专员；初次提交时未附联邦所得税申报表、审计财务报表或年度报告，仅提供受益人工资单及H-1B工作授权材料。

   核对原文依据

   It requests her classification as a professional worker under the third preference employment-based immigrant visa category.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页

   did not initially submit copies of its federal income tax return, audited financial statements, or annual report as required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2)

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
2. 补件

   2022年4月，德州服务中心发出补件通知，指出初次提交的证据不足以证明支付能力；申请人于2022年6月补交材料，意在证明其一直按承诺工资支付受益人，但仍未包含被要求的所得税申报表、审计财务报表或年度报告。

   核对原文依据

   In a request for evidence (RFE) issued in April 2022, the Petitioner was notified that insufficient evidence was initially submitted to establish its ability to pay the proffered wage.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页

   Although the Petitioner responded to the RFE in June 2022 with additional documentation intended to establish that it had been paying the Beneficiary the proffered wage

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
3. 原审拒绝决定

   德州服务中心主任拒绝该申请，认定记录未能证明申请人有能力支付承诺工资；主任依据8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(2)(i)，在缺少规定初始证据的情况下不考虑其他次要证据，并指出申请人未解释为何无法取得该证据或证明其不可获得。

   核对原文依据

   The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the record did not establish the Petitioner's ability to pay the proffered wage.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页

   The Director, citing 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(2)(i), declined to consider other "secondary" evidence of the Petitioner's ability to pay in the absence ofthis required initial evidence

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
4. 复议动议

   申请人随后提交合并的重开与复议动议，并附上2020年和2021年联邦所得税申报表；主任在驳回动议的决定中未认可申请人随重开动议提交的该证据。

   核对原文依据

   The Petitioner subsequently filed combined motions to reopen and reconsider, which the Director dismissed.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页

   In the decision dismissing the motions, the Director did not acknowledge the Petitioner's submission of this evidence in support of its motion to reopen.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
5. 上诉

   申请人向行政上诉办公室提出上诉；上诉中重新提交上述税表，并主张其自优先日起一直向受益人支付等于或高于60,000美元承诺工资的薪水，因而已证明支付能力。

   核对原文依据

   On appeal, the Petitioner resubmits copies of these tax returns and contends that it established its ability to pay based on evidence that it has been paying the Beneficiary a salary equal to or greater than the proffered wage of $60,000 since the priority date.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页

逐项证据分析

按争议点查看申请主张、原审意见、具体证据与 AAO 理由。点击每项标题可展开或收起。

阅读提示与适用边界

以下为基于本案的材料核对提示，不是 AAO 对其他案件的裁定。

• 阅读提示：核对工资单的出具主体是否为申请公司；若为“Premier Corporate Professional”，需看记录中是否有两者关系的说明或支持文件，AAO明确指出该缺口。
  核对原文依据

  The Petitioner did not provide an explanation or supporting documentation demonstrating its relationship with this entity

  查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
• 阅读提示：核对2021年税表在补件回复时是否已经可得；AAO脚注指出根据2021年6月优先日，最早相关税表为2021年税表，而该税表申报期限为2022年9月15日或之前，故补件回复时似乎尚不可得。此为阅读核对线索，不表示补交税表即必然获批。
  核对原文依据

  Based on this petition's June 2021 priority date, the earliest relevant tax return for purposes of evaluating the Petitioner's ability to pay is its 2021 tax return.

  查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
• 阅读提示：核对主任在发回后是否实际审查了税表、工资单及其他支付能力证据；AAO仅认定主任尚未审查，并未对支付能力作出实体结论。
  核对原文依据

  The Director has not yet reviewed the Petitioner's tax returns and other relevant evidence it submitted to demonstrate that it has been paying the Beneficiary the proffered wage since the priority date.

  查看英文原件 · 第 2 页