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.
advanced degree or foreign equivalent as of priority date
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO concluded that the evidence is insufficient to establish that the beneficiary had been awarded a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree by the priority date; the certificate ultimately submitted shows conferral on May 18, 2013, after the August 15, 2012 priority date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded that the evidence is insufficient to establish that the beneficiary had been awarded a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree by the priority date; the certificate ultimately submitted shows conferral on May 18, 2013, after the August 15, 2012 priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_03_B5203; source_row=16852 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than an available U.S. worker with the same minimum qualifications
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the petitioner's awards were local or institutional, the support letters did not show influence beyond her schools, and the temporary debarment of her employer is not a basis for waiver. The petitioner did not demonstrate a past history of achievement with influence on the field as a whole.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the petitioner's awards were local or institutional, the support letters did not show influence beyond her schools, and the temporary debarment of her employer is not a basis for waiver. The petitioner did not demonstrate a past history of achievement with influence on the field as a whole.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_01_B5203; source_row=16851 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
beneficiary holds an advanced degree or foreign equivalent
Why AAO was not persuaded
The beneficiary's qualifications are a combination of a B.A. and ACCA exam completion, producing only the 'equivalent' of a bachelor's degree, not a single foreign equivalent degree from a college or university as required.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The beneficiary's qualifications are a combination of a B.A. and ACCA exam completion, producing only the 'equivalent' of a bachelor's degree, not a single foreign equivalent degree from a college or university as required.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_05_B5203; source_row=16855 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
national in scope
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO concluded the impact of one teacher in one school is too attenuated at the national level to qualify; the references showed only local or institutional impact, and the NCLBA does not exempt teachers from NYSDOT.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded the impact of one teacher in one school is too attenuated at the national level to qualify; the references showed only local or institutional impact, and the NCLBA does not exempt teachers from NYSDOT.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_01_B5203; source_row=16850 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary meets minimum requirements of offered position (60 months experience in job offered, including supervisory duties)
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Level II position requires supervisory experience as evidenced by the job duties and GAL 2-98. The beneficiary's permissible prior-employer experience letters do not mention supervisory duties, so those positions are not 'in the job offered' and do not satisfy the labor certification's 60-month requirement.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Level II position requires supervisory experience as evidenced by the job duties and GAL 2-98. The beneficiary's permissible prior-employer experience letters do not mention supervisory duties, so those positions are not 'in the job offered' and do not satisfy the labor certification's 60-month requirement.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_04_B5203; source_row=16854 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary possesses an advanced degree or equivalent (baccalaureate + 5 years progressive post-baccalaureate experience)
Why AAO was not persuaded
Pre-baccalaureate experience cannot count; current employer experience is excluded because the beneficiary's position with the petitioner is substantially comparable to the offered position; the remaining post-baccalaureate qualifying experience is only approximately 28 months, well short of the required 60 months. One experience letter was also unsigned and did not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Pre-baccalaureate experience cannot count; current employer experience is excluded because the beneficiary's position with the petitioner is substantially comparable to the offered position; the remaining post-baccalaureate qualifying experience is only approximately 28 months, well short of the required 60 months. One experience letter was also unsigned and did not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_04_B5203; source_row=16853 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
five years of qualifying experience required by labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
Experience with the petitioner is in a substantially comparable position and cannot be used; earlier work with the petitioner was as Business Development Manager (an alternate occupation not accepted); the Indian employer letter is signed by an unnamed 'authorized signatory' and describes a sales/marketing position, not cost accountant.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Experience with the petitioner is in a substantially comparable position and cannot be used; earlier work with the petitioner was as Business Development Manager (an alternate occupation not accepted); the Indian employer letter is signed by an unnamed 'authorized signatory' and describes a sales/marketing position, not cost accountant.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_05_B5203; source_row=16856 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
continuing ability to pay proffered wage from priority date
Why AAO was not persuaded
Documents predate the priority date or show wages substantially below the proffered wage, and the petitioner did not address aggregate ability to pay across its 20+ pending I-140s.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Documents predate the priority date or show wages substantially below the proffered wage, and the petitioner did not address aggregate ability to pay across its 20+ pending I-140s.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-08-01_05_B5203; source_row=16857 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agrees the degree does not qualify because the institution is unaccredited, but expressly disagrees with the director's reliance on Matter of Yau and Tang v. INS, finding those authorities do not directly apply.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agrees the degree does not qualify because the institution is unaccredited, but expressly disagrees with the director's reliance on Matter of Yau and Tang v. INS, finding those authorities do not directly apply.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-07-31_03_B5203; source_row=16847 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c