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 10341–10350
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
AAO concurred that the letters attested to the Petitioner's talent and workshop activities but failed to provide specific examples of how her contributions impacted the broader field or influenced subsequent work by other artists. Generalized and conclusory statements are insufficient to demonstrate major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO concurred that the letters attested to the Petitioner's talent and workshop activities but failed to provide specific examples of how her contributions impacted the broader field or influenced subsequent work by other artists. Generalized and conclusory statements are insufficient to demonstrate major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-10_02_B2203; source_row=29197 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that while the Petitioner's proposed work has substantial merit, it lacks national importance because the evidence does not show that her endeavor's prospective impact extends beyond her company and its clientele.…
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 +
AAO found that while the Petitioner's proposed work has substantial merit, it lacks national importance because the evidence does not show that her endeavor's prospective impact extends beyond her company and its clientele. Her sales forecasts and staffing projections do not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects, and she has not shown that the area where she operates is economically depressed or that employment levels would provide a substantial regional or national economic benefit.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-10_02_B5203; source_row=29201 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the prospective employer's 10-year revenue and job growth estimates did not reference the Petitioner or his proposed endeavor, meaning that revenue and hiring would occur regardless of the Petitioner. General industry articles did not address how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would produce national-importance-level economic effects.…
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 +
AAO found that the prospective employer's 10-year revenue and job growth estimates did not reference the Petitioner or his proposed endeavor, meaning that revenue and hiring would occur regardless of the Petitioner. General industry articles did not address how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would produce national-importance-level economic effects. COVID-19 articles were inadmissible because they post-dated the 2018 filing and lacked probative value specific to the Petitioner's endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-10_01_B5203; source_row=29194 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the reference letters did not show citations or implementation of the Petitioner's research, her education and clinical experience alone were insufficient, and the record did not demonstrate that her work has served as an impetus for progress or generated substantial positive discourse in the field.
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 that the reference letters did not show citations or implementation of the Petitioner's research, her education and clinical experience alone were insufficient, and the record did not demonstrate that her work has served as an impetus for progress or generated substantial positive discourse in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-09_03_B5203; source_row=29191 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalProfessor
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed the proposed oral health research has broader implications because results are disseminated through medical journals and conferences, satisfying prong one.
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 +
AAO agreed the proposed oral health research has broader implications because results are disseminated through medical journals and conferences, satisfying prong one.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-09_03_B5203; source_row=29190 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
AAO found that the record lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate claims of national-level economic impact. The Petitioner did not demonstrate how his innovations would affect the national economy directly or indirectly, how his endeavor would create substantial revenue or GDP impact, or how it would have significant potential to employ U.S. workers.…
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 +
AAO found that the record lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate claims of national-level economic impact. The Petitioner did not demonstrate how his innovations would affect the national economy directly or indirectly, how his endeavor would create substantial revenue or GDP impact, or how it would have significant potential to employ U.S. workers. The submitted recommendation letters praised the Petitioner's qualifications generally but did not establish the prospective national impact of his specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-03-09_02_B5203; source_row=29187 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c