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.
Qualifying experience with the petitioner-employer
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO credited approximately 46 months of qualifying experience with the Petitioner (not 50 as the Director found), noting the record showed no employment from May 2012 to April 2013. The positions were not substantially comparable to the offered position, so the experience counted.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO credited approximately 46 months of qualifying experience with the Petitioner (not 50 as the Director found), noting the record showed no employment from May 2012 to April 2013. The positions were not substantially comparable to the offered position, so the experience counted.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_05_B5203; source_row=20113 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Qualifying experience with first non-petitioner U.S. employer (acquired company)
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the record on appeal established the unavailability of a required employer letter (acquisition and mass layoffs) and credited approximately seven months of qualifying experience based on the manager's affidavit.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the record on appeal established the unavailability of a required employer letter (acquisition and mass layoffs) and credited approximately seven months of qualifying experience based on the manager's affidavit.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_05_B5203; source_row=20114 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
Considering the totality of the evidence including publications, editorial roles, expert testimony, and inaugural committee selection, AAO found sustained national and international acclaim at the 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 +
Considering the totality of the evidence including publications, editorial roles, expert testimony, and inaugural committee selection, AAO found sustained national and international acclaim at the top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_02_B2203; source_row=20098 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Continuing ability to pay the proffered wage from priority date
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that 2014 net income of $9,227 and net current assets of -$12,862 were insufficient to cover the $67,913.98 wage gap, let alone the additional obligation to a second I-140 beneficiary. The audited financials were rejected because they reflected accrual accounting inconsistent with the Petitioner's cash-basis tax filings and lacked a cash flow statement.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that 2014 net income of $9,227 and net current assets of -$12,862 were insufficient to cover the $67,913.98 wage gap, let alone the additional obligation to a second I-140 beneficiary. The audited financials were rejected because they reflected accrual accounting inconsistent with the Petitioner's cash-basis tax filings and lacked a cash flow statement. The shareholder's personal assets could not be imputed to the corporation. The Sonegawa totality analysis also weighed against the Petitioner given the lack of evidence of industry reputation or unusual one-time expenditures.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_02_B5203; source_row=20099 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 found the totality of evidence showed the Petitioner had risen to the very top of his field and received the necessary national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the totality of evidence showed the Petitioner had risen to the very top of his field and received the necessary national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-08_01_B2203; source_row=20081 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c