Source-backed decision research

Explore how AAO evaluates evidence.

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.

Clear filters

10,847 decisions / 36,849 findings

Showing 10281–10290

EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

OtherFaculty

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

final merits determination

What the decision said

AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary because the Petitioner failed step 1, but noted in dicta that the record would not support a finding of the required acclaim.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary because the Petitioner failed step 1, but noted in dicta that the record would not support a finding of the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-23_01_B2203; source_row=29287
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot established

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

final merits determination

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO evaluated all evidence in the record—including judging, publications, leading roles, memberships, original contributions, and salary—and found that none demonstrated national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.…

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The AAO evaluated all evidence in the record—including judging, publications, leading roles, memberships, original contributions, and salary—and found that none demonstrated national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field. The judging experience was limited to local academic settings, the publication record was sparse, the leading role letters did not show field-wide recognition, and reference letters lacked specifics about citations or attention garnered.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-22_01_B2203; source_row=29275
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

While the record supported a finding of substantial merit (IT and entrepreneurship services), the Petitioner failed to show that his proposed endeavor's prospective impact rises to the level of national importance.…

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 +
While the record supported a finding of substantial merit (IT and entrepreneurship services), the Petitioner failed to show that his proposed endeavor's prospective impact rises to the level of national importance. His recommendation letters addressed his skills rather than broader implications, and his business plan's staffing and sales projections did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects for Florida or the United States.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-22_01_B5203; source_row=29279
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner authored some scholarly material satisfying the published material criterion.

Why this is useful

See how AAO evaluated whether the work qualified as scholarly authorship and what it showed in the full record.

View full reasoning +
The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner authored some scholarly material satisfying the published material criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-22_01_B2203; source_row=29273
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

Why the evidence was persuasive

The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner satisfied the judging criterion by serving as an evaluator on examination boards for student works at various institutions.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner satisfied the judging criterion by serving as an evaluator on examination boards for student works at various institutions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-22_01_B2203; source_row=29272
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Leading / critical role

leading or critical role

Why the evidence was persuasive

The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner serves in a critical position as laboratory coordinator and as First Secretary of a professional organization.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The Director found and AAO accepted that the Petitioner serves in a critical position as laboratory coordinator and as First Secretary of a professional organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-22_01_B2203; source_row=29274
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWotherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

other

Schedule A designation – proposed employment as a professional nurse

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO affirmed that the Petitioner's inconsistent job descriptions — clinical duties on the PWD versus supervisory/administrative duties on the labor certification application — were not resolved despite an RFE, precluding a determination that the position requires a professional nurse.…

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed that the Petitioner's inconsistent job descriptions — clinical duties on the PWD versus supervisory/administrative duties on the labor certification application — were not resolved despite an RFE, precluding a determination that the position requires a professional nurse. The cited USCIS memo does not establish that all supervisory nurses qualify, and the Utah state regulation does not control Schedule A eligibility under federal DOL standards.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-18_01_B5203; source_row=29266
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWotherReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

other

Eligibility for EB-2 advanced degree immigrant visa category

What the decision said

AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary to the result given the Schedule A designation finding.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary to the result given the Schedule A designation finding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-18_01_B5203; source_row=29267
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found the Petitioner's PhD, published articles with high citation rates, peer review activity, reference letters attesting to her expertise, and documented research progress collectively established she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner's PhD, published articles with high citation rates, peer review activity, reference letters attesting to her expertise, and documented research progress collectively established she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-18_02_B5203; source_row=29270
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why the evidence was persuasive

The Petitioner provided letters of support describing how her research would advance cancer treatment methods, information about cancer's impact on U.S. public health, and documentation that her results are disseminated through scientific journals and conferences, establishing both substantial merit and national importance.

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 +
The Petitioner provided letters of support describing how her research would advance cancer treatment methods, information about cancer's impact on U.S. public health, and documentation that her results are disseminated through scientific journals and conferences, establishing both substantial merit and national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-18_02_B5203; source_row=29269
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
← Back to assessment