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 combined proffered wages for all I-140 beneficiaries
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's chart of 25 petitions was incomplete—USCIS records showed 59 I-140 petitions in 2017 alone—and omitted EB-2 petitions for physical therapists with higher wages. No petition status information was provided, making total obligation incalculable. Bank statements are not among the three enumerated types of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and cannot demonstrate sustainable ability to pay.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's chart of 25 petitions was incomplete—USCIS records showed 59 I-140 petitions in 2017 alone—and omitted EB-2 petitions for physical therapists with higher wages. No petition status information was provided, making total obligation incalculable. Bank statements are not among the three enumerated types of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and cannot demonstrate sustainable ability to pay. Future earnings projections are impermissible under Matter of Great Wall.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-04-02_01_B5203; source_row=23773 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Ability to pay proffered wage to primary Beneficiary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The paystubs show payment at $62,400 annually, which is below the offered wage of $70,616, and do not cover the period from September 15, 2017 through July 1, 2018. The Petitioner has not established it paid the Beneficiary at least the offered wage since the priority date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The paystubs show payment at $62,400 annually, which is below the offered wage of $70,616, and do not cover the period from September 15, 2017 through July 1, 2018. The Petitioner has not established it paid the Beneficiary at least the offered wage since the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-04-02_01_B5203; source_row=23772 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO concluded the Petitioner demonstrated sustained national/international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the very top of fashion modeling.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded the Petitioner demonstrated sustained national/international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the very top of fashion modeling.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-04-02_02_B2203; source_row=23777 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
labor certification supports advanced degree professional classification
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO reaffirmed that the labor certification's requirements control and that a bachelor's degree plus one year of experience does not meet the regulatory definition of an advanced degree.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reaffirmed that the labor certification's requirements control and that a bachelor's degree plus one year of experience does not meet the regulatory definition of an advanced degree.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-03-28_01_B5203; source_row=23765 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
beneficiary's qualifying experience under labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO cited 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1) as the controlling authority requiring employer letters and found no corroborating evidence of the claimed prior employment was submitted.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO cited 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1) as the controlling authority requiring employer letters and found no corroborating evidence of the claimed prior employment was submitted.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-03-28_01_B5203; source_row=23766 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that the limited time devoted to research and lack of specificity about research projects rendered the research endeavor insufficient for the first prong. As to clinical and teaching duties, while they have substantial merit, the record did not establish that they would impact the broader fields of diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, or the U.S. healthcare industry beyond the patients served and trainees taught.
Why this is useful
Compare how the decision separates a broadly important field from the prospective impact of the applicant’s specific work.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the limited time devoted to research and lack of specificity about research projects rendered the research endeavor insufficient for the first prong. As to clinical and teaching duties, while they have substantial merit, the record did not establish that they would impact the broader fields of diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, or the U.S. healthcare industry beyond the patients served and trainees taught.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-03-27_01_B5203; source_row=23757 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
Even assuming the research endeavor met prong one, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate she is well positioned to advance it. Her citation record lacked comparative context, article downloads did not demonstrate that her research was implemented or generated substantial interest, and she did not show her work had affected clinical practice or served as an impetus for progress in the field.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
Even assuming the research endeavor met prong one, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate she is well positioned to advance it. Her citation record lacked comparative context, article downloads did not demonstrate that her research was implemented or generated substantial interest, and she did not show her work had affected clinical practice or served as an impetus for progress in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-03-27_01_B5203; source_row=23758 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c