National scale must be argued, not assumed.

Impact confined to clients, an employer, or a region populates the denial record.

In the denial record

Local-not-national scope appears in 58.8%, and employer-specific benefit in 23.9%, of decisions carrying a Prong-1 code.

coded appeal decisions · S48 (n=2,900)

In the sustained decisions

Magnitude of impact is addressed explicitly in 89% of sustained decisions, against 1% of the stratified losses.

sustained decisions (n=89) · stratified dismissals (n=202) · S80

Published approvals

0 of 479 advance an economic-scale or job-creation argument. None.

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: National scale must be argued, not assumed. Impact confined to clients, an employer, or a region populates the denial record.

YOUR TASK: Check whether my draft ARGUES a national-scale mechanism explicitly, or merely assumes it. Flag any impact that reads as limited to clients, an employer, or a region, and propose how to argue the magnitude with corroborated facts I supply.

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

Case setDecisions carrying local-not-national scope — open in Case Search →

Insight vaultInsight vault: Framing the endeavor

Each record describes itself; sustained decisions are the wins inside the appeal record, not a separate population. No figure predicts an individual outcome.

← Previous Next →