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.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 10201–10210
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO concluded the Petitioner's role as founding partner and executive producer demonstrated his leading role, and the company's ANDA awards and top-four industry ranking established the company's distinguished reputation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded the Petitioner's role as founding partner and executive producer demonstrated his leading role, and the company's ANDA awards and top-four industry ranking established the company's distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-23_01_B2203; source_row=29399 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner served as a tribunal member for the 23rd Congress of the Latin American Medical Association for Rehabilitation in 2008, satisfying the judging criterion.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner served as a tribunal member for the 23rd Congress of the Latin American Medical Association for Rehabilitation in 2008, satisfying the judging criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-23_02_B2203; source_row=29405 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why the evidence was persuasive
The Petitioner demonstrated a leading or critical role with his current employer, including evidence of the hospital's distinguished reputation in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner demonstrated a leading or critical role with his current employer, including evidence of the hospital's distinguished reputation in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-23_02_B2203; source_row=29407 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's reference letters praised his literary and documentary work but did not provide specific examples of how his contributions have had a demonstrable major impact in the field. Recognition and favorable reviews do not equate to major significance. One expert acknowledged the films are 'known to a very limited number of people,' which undermined the major significance claim.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's reference letters praised his literary and documentary work but did not provide specific examples of how his contributions have had a demonstrable major impact in the field. Recognition and favorable reviews do not equate to major significance. One expert acknowledged the films are 'known to a very limited number of people,' which undermined the major significance claim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-19_03_B2203; source_row=29394 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner submitted letters attesting to jury service at a film festival in 2008 and 2009, but the AAO found no documentary evidence showing specifically who was judged, the nature of the events, the competitive categories, or the selection criteria. Letters alone without corroborating documentary evidence are insufficient.…
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted letters attesting to jury service at a film festival in 2008 and 2009, but the AAO found no documentary evidence showing specifically who was judged, the nature of the events, the competitive categories, or the selection criteria. Letters alone without corroborating documentary evidence are insufficient. The AAO noted the Director had erroneously applied the sustained acclaim standard to a step-one criterion, but found this harmless because the Director otherwise correctly applied the plain language of the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-19_03_B2203; source_row=29393 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
Only four of the nine articles contained the required title, date, and author. More importantly, none of the articles constituted published material about the Petitioner — they were about the company. The Petitioner was not mentioned in seven articles and was only quoted providing background information in two. AAO reserved the question of publication quality.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Only four of the nine articles contained the required title, date, and author. More importantly, none of the articles constituted published material about the Petitioner — they were about the company. The Petitioner was not mentioned in seven articles and was only quoted providing background information in two. AAO reserved the question of publication quality.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-19_02_B2203; source_row=29386 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the project was displayed at an artistic exhibition or showcase. According to the documentation, the project was built on land on the outskirts of a city, which does not constitute an artistic venue consistent with the regulatory criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the project was displayed at an artistic exhibition or showcase. According to the documentation, the project was built on land on the outskirts of a city, which does not constitute an artistic venue consistent with the regulatory criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-19_02_B2203; source_row=29387 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c