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.
advanced degree or equivalent (five years progressive experience)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that the company formation records and Articles of Association amendments do not satisfy the regulatory requirement for employer letters under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B), and that work as a physical education teacher and soccer referee does not relate to the specialty of entrepreneurship.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the company formation records and Articles of Association amendments do not satisfy the regulatory requirement for employer letters under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B), and that work as a physical education teacher and soccer referee does not relate to the specialty of entrepreneurship.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-17_01_B5203; source_row=29376 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
None of the documents submitted by the Petitioner specifically identified the petition or Beneficiary for which the filing fee was being paid. The check was dated more than two months before the petition was filed, lacked any DHS or Treasury marking confirming receipt and deposit, and a USCIS refund letter to the Beneficiary confirmed the petition was revoked for a bounced check.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
None of the documents submitted by the Petitioner specifically identified the petition or Beneficiary for which the filing fee was being paid. The check was dated more than two months before the petition was filed, lacked any DHS or Treasury marking confirming receipt and deposit, and a USCIS refund letter to the Beneficiary confirmed the petition was revoked for a bounced check. The Petitioner failed to reconcile these evidentiary inconsistencies.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-16_03_B5203; source_row=29374 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO independently reviewed the record and concluded that section 204(c) applies because there is substantial and probative evidence the marriage lacked bona fides. The Petitioner failed to address the District Director's specific evidentiary findings from the I-130 proceeding, submitted only bare affidavits without new substantive evidence, and did not adequately explain the lack of the Beneficiary's possessions in the shar…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO independently reviewed the record and concluded that section 204(c) applies because there is substantial and probative evidence the marriage lacked bona fides. The Petitioner failed to address the District Director's specific evidentiary findings from the I-130 proceeding, submitted only bare affidavits without new substantive evidence, and did not adequately explain the lack of the Beneficiary's possessions in the shared residence or his extended absences.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-16_01_B5203; source_row=29369 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO does not reach the ultimate final merits question because the Director's analysis was incomplete; AAO only notes it may agree that the 2007 judging activity is not indicative of acclaim, but the remaining criteria evidence must still be weighed.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO does not reach the ultimate final merits question because the Director's analysis was incomplete; AAO only notes it may agree that the 2007 judging activity is not indicative of acclaim, but the remaining criteria evidence must still be weighed.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-16_02_B2203; source_row=29370 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
All evidence submitted on appeal was dated after the December 2018 petition filing date and therefore could not establish eligibility. Even if considered, the business plan lacked sufficient detail to show the endeavor would significantly employ U.S. workers, and the articles and advisory council invitation did not address how the specific endeavor would produce substantial positive economic effects at the national level.
Why this is useful
Compare how the decision separates a broadly important field from the prospective impact of the applicant’s specific work.
View full reasoning +
All evidence submitted on appeal was dated after the December 2018 petition filing date and therefore could not establish eligibility. Even if considered, the business plan lacked sufficient detail to show the endeavor would significantly employ U.S. workers, and the articles and advisory council invitation did not address how the specific endeavor would produce substantial positive economic effects at the national level.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-16_02_B5203; source_row=29371 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO agreed with the Director that the purchase orders and invoices were insufficient to establish the Petitioner's personal earnings because they did not reflect compensation to the Petitioner specifically, and there was no verifiable tax documentation or other evidence confirming actual remuneration received.
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 that the purchase orders and invoices were insufficient to establish the Petitioner's personal earnings because they did not reflect compensation to the Petitioner specifically, and there was no verifiable tax documentation or other evidence confirming actual remuneration received.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-12_01_B2203; source_row=29366 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
While the AAO found sufficient evidence that the Petitioner held a leading or critical role in the company, the record lacked independent documentary evidence establishing that the company itself had a distinguished reputation. Client testimonial letters and press articles spoke to the Petitioner's personal reputation, not the company's.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
While the AAO found sufficient evidence that the Petitioner held a leading or critical role in the company, the record lacked independent documentary evidence establishing that the company itself had a distinguished reputation. Client testimonial letters and press articles spoke to the Petitioner's personal reputation, not the company's.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-05-12_01_B2203; source_row=29365 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c