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.
beneficiary possesses qualifications stated on ETA Form 9089
Why AAO was not persuaded
Part H of the ETA Form 9089 required a master's degree with no alternative education-experience combination, and because the beneficiary's foreign education equates only to a U.S. bachelor's degree, the petitioner did not establish the beneficiary met the labor certification's stated requirements.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Part H of the ETA Form 9089 required a master's degree with no alternative education-experience combination, and because the beneficiary's foreign education equates only to a U.S. bachelor's degree, the petitioner did not establish the beneficiary met the labor certification's stated requirements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_06_B5203; source_row=15509 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
beneficiary possesses minimum education stated on labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO agreed with the director, preferring EDGE's juried opinion that the Indian Master of Science is comparable only to a U.S. bachelor's degree, and rejecting the petitioner's inconsistent credential evaluations.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO agreed with the director, preferring EDGE's juried opinion that the Indian Master of Science is comparable only to a U.S. bachelor's degree, and rejecting the petitioner's inconsistent credential evaluations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_11_B5203; source_row=15515 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Ability to pay via wages actually paid to beneficiary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The beneficiary received $64,249.92 in 2008 and 2009, and $58,895.76 in 2010 — all below the proffered wage — so the petitioner did not establish prima facie ability to pay through wages paid.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The beneficiary received $64,249.92 in 2008 and 2009, and $58,895.76 in 2010 — all below the proffered wage — so the petitioner did not establish prima facie ability to pay through wages paid.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_12_B5203; source_row=15516 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Ability to pay via totality of circumstances / overall business magnitude
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Dun & Bradstreet reports did not address the 2008 or early 2009 period; future earnings projections cannot overcome documented inability to pay at the priority date per Matter of Great Wall; and the sharp increase in gross receipts did not explain the very low net income figures. The petitioner also failed to address a second pending I-140 for another beneficiary with the same proffered wage.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Dun & Bradstreet reports did not address the 2008 or early 2009 period; future earnings projections cannot overcome documented inability to pay at the priority date per Matter of Great Wall; and the sharp increase in gross receipts did not explain the very low net income figures. The petitioner also failed to address a second pending I-140 for another beneficiary with the same proffered wage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_12_B5203; source_row=15518 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Labor certification supports advanced degree professional classification
Why AAO was not persuaded
Because Part H.14 of the labor certification allows the bachelor's degree requirement to be met by a combination of degrees and/or certifications, the job offer does not require a full bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience, and thus cannot support the EB-2 advanced degree professional category.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because Part H.14 of the labor certification allows the bachelor's degree requirement to be met by a combination of degrees and/or certifications, the job offer does not require a full bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience, and thus cannot support the EB-2 advanced degree professional category.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_03_B5203; source_row=15502 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The appellate brief did not point to any specific error in the director's analysis and offered no directed argument, so the AAO deemed this issue abandoned.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The appellate brief did not point to any specific error in the director's analysis and offered no directed argument, so the AAO deemed this issue abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_02_B2203; source_row=15492 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Net income was -$24,913 in 2009 and $95,908 in 2010, both insufficient relative to the $121,430 proffered wage. The petitioner's officer compensation argument was rejected because no sworn affidavit was provided showing the sole shareholder agreed to forego compensation, and a Form W-2 was discredited due to an unresolved inconsistency with the 2010 Form 1120S.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Net income was -$24,913 in 2009 and $95,908 in 2010, both insufficient relative to the $121,430 proffered wage. The petitioner's officer compensation argument was rejected because no sworn affidavit was provided showing the sole shareholder agreed to forego compensation, and a Form W-2 was discredited due to an unresolved inconsistency with the 2010 Form 1120S. Counting Schedule K income separately would constitute double-counting.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-19_04_B5203; source_row=15504 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c