Statistics-included
The theory of the case
“My company will create jobs” is the losing theory.
Unsupported economic and job-creation claims dominate the denial record; founders are the sharpest case.
In the denial record
Unsupported economic claims appear in 82.4%, and speculative business plans in 39.1%, of decisions carrying a Prong-1 code. Founder-led petitions in the appeal record: 1,510; founder appeals sustained: 0.
coded appeal decisions · S48 (n=2,900) · S6 · S7
In the sustained decisions
Economic job creation is invoked in 6% of sustained appeals against 40% of losses — the credited mirror is field advancement shown through adoption.
sustained decisions (n=89) · stratified dismissals (n=202) · S81
Published approvals
The 479 sample is not split by archetype, so founders cannot be isolated — but across all 479, a generic economic-growth argument appears in just 13 (3%), against field advancement in 393 (82%).
of a 479-approval stratified sample of law-firm published approvals
Advertised approvals a firm chose to publish — a story is counted where it advances an argument, not where it proved decisive — and never merged with the appeal record.
Work on this with your AI
Copy this prompt, paste it to your AI assistant, and add your draft where marked.
I am preparing an EB-2 NIW (National Interest Waiver) petition and want you to review a draft against a finding from the public record of NIW decisions. THE FINDING: “My company will create jobs” is the losing theory. Unsupported economic and job-creation claims dominate the denial record; founders are the sharpest case. YOUR TASK: Flag every economic or job-creation claim and tell me whether it is corroborated by a document I name or is a projection. Propose how to reframe the theory around field advancement shown through adoption of my work. RULES: Work only from what I paste — do not invent facts about me. Do not predict outcomes or estimate chances. Point to specific sentences and propose concrete rewrites. --- MY DRAFT --- [Paste your draft here]
The prompt asks your AI to review your own draft against this finding — it never predicts an outcome.
Sources & references
PrecedentMatter of Dhanasar (AAO 2016) — the three-prong framework; flags self-employed petitions as a zone where adjudication is ill-suited
Insight vaultInsight vault: The theory of the case
Each record describes itself; sustained decisions are the wins inside the appeal record, not a separate population. No figure predicts an individual outcome.