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.
Net current assets sufficient to cover proffered wage shortfall
Why AAO was not persuaded
The 2007 tax return reflected net current assets of -$19,710, which were insufficient to cover the shortfall between wages paid and the proffered wage.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The 2007 tax return reflected net current assets of -$19,710, which were insufficient to cover the shortfall between wages paid and the proffered wage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_04_B5203; source_row=13236 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO considered the Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances factors sua sponte and found them unhelpful to the petitioner: the company had declining gross receipts, only two tax returns in record, net losses in both years, only 3 employees, and no evidence of business reputation comparable to the Sonegawa petitioner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO considered the Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances factors sua sponte and found them unhelpful to the petitioner: the company had declining gross receipts, only two tax returns in record, net losses in both years, only 3 employees, and no evidence of business reputation comparable to the Sonegawa petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_04_B5203; source_row=13237 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Wages paid to beneficiary at or above proffered wage
Why AAO was not persuaded
The beneficiary received $62,604 in 2007 via Dates, Inc., which is less than the proffered wage of $99,507.20, leaving a gap of $36,903.20 that the petitioner must cover through net income or net current assets.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The beneficiary received $62,604 in 2007 via Dates, Inc., which is less than the proffered wage of $99,507.20, leaving a gap of $36,903.20 that the petitioner must cover through net income or net current assets.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_04_B5203; source_row=13234 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Net income sufficient to cover proffered wage shortfall
Why AAO was not persuaded
The 2007 federal income tax return showed a net loss of -$408,215. The AAO rejected arguments to add back depreciation and amortization as actual costs of doing business per River Street Donuts and Chi-Feng Chang precedents. Unaudited profit and loss statements were also rejected as unreliable management representations. CPA projections of future earnings were rejected per Matter of Great Wall.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The 2007 federal income tax return showed a net loss of -$408,215. The AAO rejected arguments to add back depreciation and amortization as actual costs of doing business per River Street Donuts and Chi-Feng Chang precedents. Unaudited profit and loss statements were also rejected as unreliable management representations. CPA projections of future earnings were rejected per Matter of Great Wall.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_04_B5203; source_row=13235 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The petitioner paid the beneficiary only $68,813 against a proffered wage of $89,170 and never submitted its 2007 tax return despite being specifically requested to do so. Assets and income of related LLCs and the owner could not be attributed to the petitioner as a separate legal entity.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner paid the beneficiary only $68,813 against a proffered wage of $89,170 and never submitted its 2007 tax return despite being specifically requested to do so. Assets and income of related LLCs and the owner could not be attributed to the petitioner as a separate legal entity. The consulting agreements did not ensure that funds received would be applied to the beneficiary's wages, and the petitioner failed to establish Sonegawa-type exceptional circumstances.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_03_B5203; source_row=13233 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
The AAO cited NYSDOT's observation that pro bono legal work by an individual attorney lacks national scope, affirming that the petitioner's intended local legal services did not meet this prong.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
The AAO cited NYSDOT's observation that pro bono legal work by an individual attorney lacks national scope, affirming that the petitioner's intended local legal services did not meet this prong.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-10-04_05_B5203; source_row=13239 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO withdrew the director's finding on two grounds: (1) the submission of a self-serving letter showing only a job title is insufficient to establish a leading or critical role without documentary evidence comparing the petitioner to other employees; and (2) the plain language of the regulation uses the plural 'organizations or establishments,' requiring leading or critical roles in more than one organization or establishment.
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 finding on two grounds: (1) the submission of a self-serving letter showing only a job title is insufficient to establish a leading or critical role without documentary evidence comparing the petitioner to other employees; and (2) the plain language of the regulation uses the plural 'organizations or establishments,' requiring leading or critical roles in more than one organization or establishment.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-09-29_04_B2203; source_row=13228 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that none of the six submitted items satisfied the criterion: items lacked required author/title/publication information, were not about the petitioner relating to his work, or were not published in professional/major trade publications or other major media. AAO also rejected the comparable evidence argument under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that none of the six submitted items satisfied the criterion: items lacked required author/title/publication information, were not about the petitioner relating to his work, or were not published in professional/major trade publications or other major media. AAO also rejected the comparable evidence argument under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-09-29_04_B2203; source_row=13227 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the totality of evidence—a single award, brief mentions in publications, head chef employment, and a prospective U.S. job offer—did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner had risen to the very top of the culinary field.
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—a single award, brief mentions in publications, head chef employment, and a prospective U.S. job offer—did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner had risen to the very top of the culinary field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2011-09-29_04_B2203; source_row=13230 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c