EB-3 Remanded — Landscaping (2022): the case was remanded for further consideration because the

Decision Summary

The case was remanded for further consideration because the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) identified new issues not addressed by the Director. While new evidence submitted on appeal suggested the beneficiary might meet the minimum three months of experience, the AAO found insufficient evidence to establish that the petitioning company was a valid successor-in-interest due to name changes and corporate conversions. The Director must resolve these discrepancies on remand.

Criteria Discussed

Sign up free to download the original PDF