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.
worksite location consistent with labor certification
What the decision said
AAO found the Director incorrectly stated the petitioner had submitted no evidence of job location, when in fact evidence of the Pennsylvania client assignment had been submitted in response to the first NOID and was not considered.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director incorrectly stated the petitioner had submitted no evidence of job location, when in fact evidence of the Pennsylvania client assignment had been submitted in response to the first NOID and was not considered.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-03_02_B5203; source_row=18545 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
beneficiary's prior employment experience to satisfy labor certification
What the decision said
AAO observed that the Director never explained why the disputed five months of employment mattered when the beneficiary's other documented experience already exceeded the one-year requirement, and remanded without resolving the issue.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO observed that the Director never explained why the disputed five months of employment mattered when the beneficiary's other documented experience already exceeded the one-year requirement, and remanded without resolving the issue.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-03_02_B5203; source_row=18544 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
location of job opportunity and identity of actual employer
Why AAO was not persuaded
The work locations on the ETA Form 9089, Form I-140, sublease (held by a separately-incorporated entity with its own FEIN), 2013 tax return, and the beneficiary's 2013 W-2 are inconsistent, and the petitioner did not adequately explain the relationship with the related entity or reconcile these discrepancies.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The work locations on the ETA Form 9089, Form I-140, sublease (held by a separately-incorporated entity with its own FEIN), 2013 tax return, and the beneficiary's 2013 W-2 are inconsistent, and the petitioner did not adequately explain the relationship with the related entity or reconcile these discrepancies.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-03_01_B5203; source_row=18543 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Considering wages paid plus net income/net current assets across 2011-2013, plus growth in sales to over $18 million and over $6 million paid in wages in 2012, the petitioner demonstrated continuing ability to pay all sponsored beneficiaries.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Considering wages paid plus net income/net current assets across 2011-2013, plus growth in sales to over $18 million and over $6 million paid in wages in 2012, the petitioner demonstrated continuing ability to pay all sponsored beneficiaries.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-03_01_B5203; source_row=18542 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other120 papers2,700 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the petitioner's research, while valuable to government clients and limited regional areas, did not demonstrate impact in the field as a whole. Letters from collaborators were vague, solicited, and failed to show wide acceptance and adoption of the petitioner's findings. Potential contributions and regional adoption are insufficient.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the petitioner's research, while valuable to government clients and limited regional areas, did not demonstrate impact in the field as a whole. Letters from collaborators were vague, solicited, and failed to show wide acceptance and adoption of the petitioner's findings. Potential contributions and regional adoption are insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-01_01_B2203; source_row=18539 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found the evidence insufficient to show the award is nationally or internationally recognized. The self-promotional nature of the primary supporting evidence (from recipients and the issuing organization) diminished its evidentiary value. Additionally, the criterion requires prizes in the plural, and the petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of multiple qualifying awards.
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 evidence insufficient to show the award is nationally or internationally recognized. The self-promotional nature of the primary supporting evidence (from recipients and the issuing organization) diminished its evidentiary value. Additionally, the criterion requires prizes in the plural, and the petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of multiple qualifying awards.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-01_01_B2203; source_row=18537 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other120 papers2,700 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner abandoned the final merits challenge by failing to contest it on appeal. Even addressing it, the AAO found the petitioner's judging experience limited to one publication, her citation record minimal, her contributions regionally limited, and her overall profile consistent with a competent but not extraordinarily acclaimed engineer.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner abandoned the final merits challenge by failing to contest it on appeal. Even addressing it, the AAO found the petitioner's judging experience limited to one publication, her citation record minimal, her contributions regionally limited, and her overall profile consistent with a competent but not extraordinarily acclaimed engineer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-01_01_B2203; source_row=18541 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO agreed the petitioner met this criterion based on her authorship of articles published in the Transportation Research Record and other professional publications.
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 AAO agreed the petitioner met this criterion based on her authorship of articles published in the Transportation Research Record and other professional publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-01_01_B2203; source_row=18540 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO agreed the petitioner met this criterion, citing evidence that she has been a regular technical paper reviewer for multiple committees and publications since 2009, reviewing approximately 10 papers per year.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The AAO agreed the petitioner met this criterion, citing evidence that she has been a regular technical paper reviewer for multiple committees and publications since 2009, reviewing approximately 10 papers per year.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-10-01_01_B2203; source_row=18538 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO withdrew the director's favorable finding, holding that the criterion is limited to the visual arts and requires tangible pieces of art on display at exhibitions. Musical performances by a performing artist do not qualify under this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the director's favorable finding, holding that the criterion is limited to the visual arts and requires tangible pieces of art on display at exhibitions. Musical performances by a performing artist do not qualify under this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-09-30_01_B2203; source_row=18530 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c