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.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 18081–18090
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Biomedical / Life Sciences16 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although the Beneficiary made original contributions that benefited his employer, the Petitioner failed to show those contributions extended beyond the employer to impact the field as a whole. Expert letters were conclusory and lacked specific examples of independent adoption of the Beneficiary's methods. The limited citation evidence was insufficient to demonstrate major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Although the Beneficiary made original contributions that benefited his employer, the Petitioner failed to show those contributions extended beyond the employer to impact the field as a whole. Expert letters were conclusory and lacked specific examples of independent adoption of the Beneficiary's methods. The limited citation evidence was insufficient to demonstrate major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B2203; source_row=20215 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Even without being required to conduct a formal final merits analysis, AAO reviewed the aggregate record and found the Beneficiary had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Even without being required to conduct a formal final merits analysis, AAO reviewed the aggregate record and found the Beneficiary had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B2203; source_row=20219 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner submitted salary data largely limited to the Beneficiary's local area and failed to provide sufficient national comparisons. Evidence that the Beneficiary's salary exceeded the average salary of other research scientists was insufficient to show 'high salary' or 'significantly high remuneration' nationally, especially compared to more experienced senior and principal research scientists.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted salary data largely limited to the Beneficiary's local area and failed to provide sufficient national comparisons. Evidence that the Beneficiary's salary exceeded the average salary of other research scientists was insufficient to show 'high salary' or 'significantly high remuneration' nationally, especially compared to more experienced senior and principal research scientists.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B2203; source_row=20218 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Discrepancy between petition filings and number of employees
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found USCIS records did not support the Director's finding. After accounting for denials, revocations, rejections, extensions, and withdrawals, there was no material discrepancy between the 31 stated employees and the H-1B/I-140 petition filings, and W-2 records showed payments to most beneficiaries.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found USCIS records did not support the Director's finding. After accounting for denials, revocations, rejections, extensions, and withdrawals, there was no material discrepancy between the 31 stated employees and the H-1B/I-140 petition filings, and W-2 records showed payments to most beneficiaries.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B5203; source_row=20220 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Continuing ability to pay proffered wage (including multiple pending petitions)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner's 2013 net income ($103,478) and net current assets ($233,537) were insufficient to cover the $377,546.74 shortfall between proffered wages and wages paid for just the eight identified beneficiaries. The Petitioner also failed to provide information about 21 other pending petitions, precluding full ability-to-pay analysis. Bank account funds were already included in the net current assets figure.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner's 2013 net income ($103,478) and net current assets ($233,537) were insufficient to cover the $377,546.74 shortfall between proffered wages and wages paid for just the eight identified beneficiaries. The Petitioner also failed to provide information about 21 other pending petitions, precluding full ability-to-pay analysis. Bank account funds were already included in the net current assets figure. Sonegawa factors did not help because the Petitioner showed no unusual losses and failed to provide full petition information.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B5203; source_row=20222 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Permanent, full-time nature of the offered position
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although AAO rejected the Director's requirement for worksite-specific contracts, AAO found the record lacked evidence of projects on which the Beneficiary could have worked from the priority date of January 25, 2013 until the September 2013 Wisconsin project began.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Although AAO rejected the Director's requirement for worksite-specific contracts, AAO found the record lacked evidence of projects on which the Beneficiary could have worked from the priority date of January 25, 2013 until the September 2013 Wisconsin project began. General business activity and payroll records were insufficient to establish intent to employ the Beneficiary in the specific offered position from the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B5203; source_row=20221 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Director concluded the Beneficiary met this criterion and the record supports this finding, as the Beneficiary published a number of scholarly papers.
Why this is useful
See how AAO evaluated whether the work qualified as scholarly authorship and what it showed in the full record.
View full reasoning +
The Director concluded the Beneficiary met this criterion and the record supports this finding, as the Beneficiary published a number of scholarly papers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B2203; source_row=20216 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner did not argue this criterion on appeal and it was deemed abandoned. AAO also noted the record did not show the Beneficiary received a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not argue this criterion on appeal and it was deemed abandoned. AAO also noted the record did not show the Beneficiary received a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-03-14_01_B2203; source_row=20211 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c