Search a substantial collection of case-specific reasoning, then narrow it by petition, field, legal issue, or date.
This expanded collection favors source-backed access over perfect automated classification. Fields, labels, summaries, and relevance may contain errors; records marked ‘broader context’ need extra care. Review the cited source before relying on any record. These appeals and motions do not show approval odds or denial rates, and are not legal advice or a prediction.
ability to pay proffered wage (single beneficiary)
Why AAO was not persuaded
The 2018 tax return did not address the unresolved 2016 and 2017 deficiencies; total assets include non-liquid depreciable assets and must be offset against liabilities; net current liabilities were insufficient in 2016 and 2017; bank statements and CPA letter were previously considered and found insufficient without any new argument identifying error.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The 2018 tax return did not address the unresolved 2016 and 2017 deficiencies; total assets include non-liquid depreciable assets and must be offset against liabilities; net current liabilities were insufficient in 2016 and 2017; bank statements and CPA letter were previously considered and found insufficient without any new argument identifying error.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-29_03_B5203; source_row=25676 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that any of the certificates were nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field. The certificates were issued by individual restaurants or establishments without supporting evidence of national or international significance, and a post-filing certificate could not establish eligibility at the time of initial filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that any of the certificates were nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field. The certificates were issued by individual restaurants or establishments without supporting evidence of national or international significance, and a post-filing certificate could not establish eligibility at the time of initial filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-28_01_B2203; source_row=25649 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner failed to include the date of the article, which is a mandatory regulatory requirement. Additionally, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the University of Urdaneta City Journal is a professional or major trade publication or major media outlet.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner failed to include the date of the article, which is a mandatory regulatory requirement. Additionally, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the University of Urdaneta City Journal is a professional or major trade publication or major media outlet.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-28_01_B2203; source_row=25651 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner provided no supporting documentation of his earnings (e.g., paystubs or tax returns), relied on a recollection letter, compared 2007 earnings to 2019 average wages, and his earnings were actually lower than average cook wages in Spain. The comparison was also to average cook wages rather than to high wages of chefs.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner provided no supporting documentation of his earnings (e.g., paystubs or tax returns), relied on a recollection letter, compared 2007 earnings to 2019 average wages, and his earnings were actually lower than average cook wages in Spain. The comparison was also to average cook wages rather than to high wages of chefs.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-28_01_B2203; source_row=25653 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Certificates showed recognition of service but not original contributions of major significance to the field. Recommendation letters praised the Petitioner's talents and abilities but did not establish how his contributions had significantly impacted the overall field, and used hyperbolic rather than specific language.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Certificates showed recognition of service but not original contributions of major significance to the field. Recommendation letters praised the Petitioner's talents and abilities but did not establish how his contributions had significantly impacted the overall field, and used hyperbolic rather than specific language.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-28_01_B2203; source_row=25652 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The evidence submitted related to employment at various restaurants rather than membership in associations. The Petitioner did not show that outstanding achievements are an essential condition for membership, did not provide bylaws or membership requirements, and did not establish that recognized national or international experts judge membership.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The evidence submitted related to employment at various restaurants rather than membership in associations. The Petitioner did not show that outstanding achievements are an essential condition for membership, did not provide bylaws or membership requirements, and did not establish that recognized national or international experts judge membership.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-28_01_B2203; source_row=25650 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the Beneficiary's salary was above average but not significantly high; BLS data showed the top 10% earned over $142,220 and U.S. News data showed 25% earned above $112,540, both above the Beneficiary's $104,690.96. The Glassdoor data cited lower averages inconsistent with more authoritative sources and the Petitioner did not explain why it should be given more weight.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the Beneficiary's salary was above average but not significantly high; BLS data showed the top 10% earned over $142,220 and U.S. News data showed 25% earned above $112,540, both above the Beneficiary's $104,690.96. The Glassdoor data cited lower averages inconsistent with more authoritative sources and the Petitioner did not explain why it should be given more weight.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-27_01_B2203; source_row=25643 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found the supporting letters lacked credibility due to evidence of common origin (all unsigned, same font, no letterhead, nearly identical formatting with blank contact fields), the trade article did not mention the Beneficiary, the referenced Exhibit G(1) letter was not in the record, and the evidence at best showed involvement in a high-profile project but was insufficient to establish a leading or critical role f…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the supporting letters lacked credibility due to evidence of common origin (all unsigned, same font, no letterhead, nearly identical formatting with blank contact fields), the trade article did not mention the Beneficiary, the referenced Exhibit G(1) letter was not in the record, and the evidence at best showed involvement in a high-profile project but was insufficient to establish a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-27_01_B2203; source_row=25642 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Civil / Structural Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO held that an organization's reputation must be established by objective evidence from identified outside sources, not self-generated promotional materials or unattributed information. Because the Petitioner failed to provide such evidence, he did not establish the organizations had distinguished reputations, making it unnecessary to address whether his roles were leading or critical.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO held that an organization's reputation must be established by objective evidence from identified outside sources, not self-generated promotional materials or unattributed information. Because the Petitioner failed to provide such evidence, he did not establish the organizations had distinguished reputations, making it unnecessary to address whether his roles were leading or critical.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-27_02_B2203; source_row=25648 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that the awards were given to enterprises, not personally to the Petitioner. The municipal Science and Technology Progress Award was not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized, and the Ministry of Construction prize lacked documentation establishing national or international recognition of the prize itself.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the awards were given to enterprises, not personally to the Petitioner. The municipal Science and Technology Progress Award was not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized, and the Ministry of Construction prize lacked documentation establishing national or international recognition of the prize itself.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-04-27_02_B2203; source_row=25645 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c