The beneficiary was a financial analyst who worked for Bloomberg Financial
Markets. In a letter of reference, the president of another company
indicated his intention to hire the beneficiary upon visa approval. The AAO
found this problematic in that many letters of reference pointed to the
importance of the beneficiary as an employee of Bloomberg. The beneficiary
made no mention of the other job offer, and the AAO questioned whether he
intended to stay at Bloomberg. If he did not, his value to the national
economy would be diminished.
The petitioner stated that "an unfavorable immigration ruling would
jeopardize the success of Bloomberg's financial operations in Western Europe
." The AAO questioned why the petitioner did not simply pursue labor
certification. It stressed that the petitioner must not simply prove the
beneficiary's benefit to the nation, but also show why it is in the national
interest to waive the labor certification requirement. The decision stated
that "a showing must be made that the standard processes are inappropriate
and that the national interest would suffer if these processes were enforced
." Moreover, the petitioner must show that the beneficiary possesses more
than a "level of training or education which could be articulated on an
application for a labor certification."
