AIDS Researcher
Matter of [Name not Provided], File No. WAC 03 005 54932 (AAO Jan. 9, 2004) (NIW granted)
The AAO sustained an appeal of a CSC denial of a NIW petition filed by a scientific researcher focusing on HIV and AIDS. The AAO determined that the petitioner, who is considered an expert in AIDS research on the African continent and in Papua New Guinea, qualified for a national interest waiver.
Evidence Submitted
Along with copies of published articles and presentation abstracts, the petitioner submitted many witness letters. The AAO decision noted that the witnesses, many of whom had worked closely with the petitioner, focused primarily on “general overviews of the petitioner’s credentials,” and observed that those witnesses who had fewer ties to the petitioner offered few details to explain the significance of his work:
Prof. Iwamoto says nothing about the petitioner’s work except “I was impressed by his keen interest in microbiology and immunology. Considering the resource poor settings [where] he has spent his career, his accomplishment is outstanding.” Those witnesses who have known the petitioner for many years offer more details. Professor Gabriel C. Ezeilo of the University of Malawi, who has known the petitioner “for over 12 years,” states that the petitioner “is well known beyond Nigeria” owing to his published monographs, clinical trials, “and his report on natural honey as a healing agent for wounds.” Prof Ezelio adds that the petitioner “was the president of the Federation of African Immunological Societies.”
In addition to the relatively weak witness letters, the petitioner submitted documentation of his national recognition. The AAO found that this evidence “[supported] the contention that the petitioner is known in Africa and Papua New Guinea as a highly regarded expert in his field.” The decision stated:
Some documents indicate a degree of recognition elsewhere as well. The petitioner has documented the national distribution of two educational pamphlets, “HIV/AIDS: Issues of concern for employers” and “HIV/AIDS: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS.”
Finally, the petitioner submitted letters from a number of third-party witnesses that attested to the many honors he has received. The AAO did not find this evidence convincing:
The petitioner submits several letters from the American Biographical Institute (ABI), the United Cultural Convention (which has the same street address as ABI), and the International Biographical Centre (which names ABI in some of its communications), indicating that the petitioner has been selected or nominated for numerous honors including the “Noble [sic] Prize.” There is no evidence that prizes or awards from these entities are considered significant except by the honorees themselves. ABI has no connection with the Nobel Prize. These entities appear to exist primarily for the purpose of selling books, plaques, and other materials (often costing hundreds of dollars each) to the purported honorees. We cannot attach significant weight to these materials, although their submission does not diminish the weight of the petitioner’s other evidence.
The Approval
While discounting the impact of the letters provided by witnesses and those entities related to the ABI, the AAO granted the petitioner a national interest waiver, finding that the petitioner adequately demonstrated his impact on the field. The decision stated:
While the record does contain several letters from the petitioner’s close associates, as well as evidence of negligible value such as the numerous letters from ABI and related entities, there remains considerable evidence of the petitioner’s international impact as a researcher and educator. This evidence establishes the petitioner as an international expert with decades of experience, rather than a recent graduate whose work is known only to his mentors and collaborators.
Of particular value was the objective evidence of the petitioner’s national and international renown, such as the documented distribution of his educational AIDS pamphlets in Papua New Guinea. The AAO found that those documents “[supported] the contention that the petitioner is known in Africa and Papua New Guinea as a highly regarded expert in his field.”
In sum, the AAO found that the evidence successfully established that the petitioner’s past record of achievement was at a level that justified a waiver of the job offer requirement:
While the petitioner’s recognition is greater in some geographic areas than in others… the petitioner appears to have elevated himself above many others in his field through his prolific research, leadership roles in national and international organizations, and other activities.
Matter of [Name not Provided], File No. WAC 03 005 54932 (AAO Jan. 9, 2004) (NIW granted)
The AAO sustained an appeal of a CSC denial of a NIW petition filed by a scientific researcher focusing on HIV and AIDS. The AAO determined that the petitioner, who is considered an expert in AIDS research on the African continent and in Papua New Guinea, qualified for a national interest waiver.
Evidence Submitted
Along with copies of published articles and presentation abstracts, the petitioner submitted many witness letters. The AAO decision noted that the witnesses, many of whom had worked closely with the petitioner, focused primarily on “general overviews of the petitioner’s credentials,” and observed that those witnesses who had fewer ties to the petitioner offered few details to explain the significance of his work:
Prof. Iwamoto says nothing about the petitioner’s work except “I was impressed by his keen interest in microbiology and immunology. Considering the resource poor settings [where] he has spent his career, his accomplishment is outstanding.” Those witnesses who have known the petitioner for many years offer more details. Professor Gabriel C. Ezeilo of the University of Malawi, who has known the petitioner “for over 12 years,” states that the petitioner “is well known beyond Nigeria” owing to his published monographs, clinical trials, “and his report on natural honey as a healing agent for wounds.” Prof Ezelio adds that the petitioner “was the president of the Federation of African Immunological Societies.”
In addition to the relatively weak witness letters, the petitioner submitted documentation of his national recognition. The AAO found that this evidence “[supported] the contention that the petitioner is known in Africa and Papua New Guinea as a highly regarded expert in his field.” The decision stated:
Some documents indicate a degree of recognition elsewhere as well. The petitioner has documented the national distribution of two educational pamphlets, “HIV/AIDS: Issues of concern for employers” and “HIV/AIDS: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS.”
Finally, the petitioner submitted letters from a number of third-party witnesses that attested to the many honors he has received. The AAO did not find this evidence convincing:
The petitioner submits several letters from the American Biographical Institute (ABI), the United Cultural Convention (which has the same street address as ABI), and the International Biographical Centre (which names ABI in some of its communications), indicating that the petitioner has been selected or nominated for numerous honors including the “Noble [sic] Prize.” There is no evidence that prizes or awards from these entities are considered significant except by the honorees themselves. ABI has no connection with the Nobel Prize. These entities appear to exist primarily for the purpose of selling books, plaques, and other materials (often costing hundreds of dollars each) to the purported honorees. We cannot attach significant weight to these materials, although their submission does not diminish the weight of the petitioner’s other evidence.
The Approval
While discounting the impact of the letters provided by witnesses and those entities related to the ABI, the AAO granted the petitioner a national interest waiver, finding that the petitioner adequately demonstrated his impact on the field. The decision stated:
While the record does contain several letters from the petitioner’s close associates, as well as evidence of negligible value such as the numerous letters from ABI and related entities, there remains considerable evidence of the petitioner’s international impact as a researcher and educator. This evidence establishes the petitioner as an international expert with decades of experience, rather than a recent graduate whose work is known only to his mentors and collaborators.
Of particular value was the objective evidence of the petitioner’s national and international renown, such as the documented distribution of his educational AIDS pamphlets in Papua New Guinea. The AAO found that those documents “[supported] the contention that the petitioner is known in Africa and Papua New Guinea as a highly regarded expert in his field.”
In sum, the AAO found that the evidence successfully established that the petitioner’s past record of achievement was at a level that justified a waiver of the job offer requirement:
While the petitioner’s recognition is greater in some geographic areas than in others… the petitioner appears to have elevated himself above many others in his field through his prolific research, leadership roles in national and international organizations, and other activities.
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
