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.
minimum requirements of offered position by priority date
Why AAO was not persuaded
The explanatory employer letter was not corroborated by independent evidence, contradicted the earlier letter through misspelling of the affiant's name, and the affiant could not credibly attest to employment records the company does not keep. The inconsistency was not resolved.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The explanatory employer letter was not corroborated by independent evidence, contradicted the earlier letter through misspelling of the affiant's name, and the affiant could not credibly attest to employment records the company does not keep. The inconsistency was not resolved.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-22_01_B5203; source_row=20459 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Bank statements are not among the three acceptable evidence types under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and cannot show sustainable ability to pay. Unaudited financial statements are management representations and unreliable. The claimed parent's tax return did not reflect ownership of the Petitioner, and state records confirmed the two entities are distinct, so no legal obligation to pay the wage was shown.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Bank statements are not among the three acceptable evidence types under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and cannot show sustainable ability to pay. Unaudited financial statements are management representations and unreliable. The claimed parent's tax return did not reflect ownership of the Petitioner, and state records confirmed the two entities are distinct, so no legal obligation to pay the wage was shown.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-22_01_B5203; source_row=20460 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO raised this issue independently on appeal. The Beneficiary's romantic relationship with a partner of the Petitioner raises the question of alien influence and control. A bona fide job offer may be invalidated by financial, marital, or friendship relationships. The Petitioner did not submit the documentation required by 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(l).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO raised this issue independently on appeal. The Beneficiary's romantic relationship with a partner of the Petitioner raises the question of alien influence and control. A bona fide job offer may be invalidated by financial, marital, or friendship relationships. The Petitioner did not submit the documentation required by 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(l).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-22_01_B5203; source_row=20461 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact involving the labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the bona fides of the job opportunity were misrepresented because the Beneficiary was a founder, president, sole director, signed corporate documents, was one of a small group of employees, and was married to a co-worker, and the secretary who signed the labor certification was presumed aware of these facts.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the bona fides of the job opportunity were misrepresented because the Beneficiary was a founder, president, sole director, signed corporate documents, was one of a small group of employees, and was married to a co-worker, and the secretary who signed the labor certification was presumed aware of these facts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-20_01_B5203; source_row=20457 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Bona fide intention to permanently employ beneficiary from priority date
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that while the Petitioner demonstrated employment of the Beneficiary from February 2015 and active business status throughout, the record showed no employees and no wages paid for over a year after the priority date of February 1, 2013, and the only client contract was dated March 23, 2015—well after 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 AAO found that while the Petitioner demonstrated employment of the Beneficiary from February 2015 and active business status throughout, the record showed no employees and no wages paid for over a year after the priority date of February 1, 2013, and the only client contract was dated March 23, 2015—well after the priority date. The Petitioner's response to the NOID provided no documentary evidence of intent to employ from the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-19_01_B5203; source_row=20455 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed that the appointment letter alone was insufficient, noting the absence of information about the event, the Petitioner's actual involvement, and the attached duties description. AAO affirmed that the burden of proof rests with the Petitioner to show he actually participated as a judge.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the appointment letter alone was insufficient, noting the absence of information about the event, the Petitioner's actual involvement, and the attached duties description. AAO affirmed that the burden of proof rests with the Petitioner to show he actually participated as a judge.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-15_01_B2203; source_row=20450 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
AAO found no explanation or supporting evidence for the claimed new style of photography. The registered postcard did not demonstrate major significance, and the 2015 exhibit was post-petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found no explanation or supporting evidence for the claimed new style of photography. The registered postcard did not demonstrate major significance, and the 2015 exhibit was post-petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-15_01_B2203; source_row=20451 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed that the Petitioner failed to corroborate his characterization of the competition's national importance, noting that statements without supporting documentation are of limited probative value. No evidence regarding the reputation or renown of the competitions or awards was provided.
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 Petitioner failed to corroborate his characterization of the competition's national importance, noting that statements without supporting documentation are of limited probative value. No evidence regarding the reputation or renown of the competitions or awards was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-15_01_B2203; source_row=20447 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that neither the letter nor other evidence provided sufficient detail about the membership process to show that outstanding achievements are required, nor did it establish that members' achievements are evaluated by national or international experts. The second organization's membership requirements were also not documented.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that neither the letter nor other evidence provided sufficient detail about the membership process to show that outstanding achievements are required, nor did it establish that members' achievements are evaluated by national or international experts. The second organization's membership requirements were also not documented.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-07-15_01_B2203; source_row=20448 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c