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 10981–10990
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed at the threshold EB-2 classification stage.
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 reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed at the threshold EB-2 classification stage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-19_03_B5203; source_row=28367 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO noted both letters described events occurring after filing, contrary to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1). The letters praised the Petitioner's personal qualities but did not identify achievements or contributions to the industry or field that have been recognized as significant.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO noted both letters described events occurring after filing, contrary to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1). The letters praised the Petitioner's personal qualities but did not identify achievements or contributions to the industry or field that have been recognized as significant.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-19_03_B5203; source_row=28366 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
exceptional ability — meeting at least 3 of 6 criteria
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner failed to address the AAO's prior findings regarding criteria (A) and (F) and did not establish membership in professional associations under criterion (E). The motion repeated prior arguments without new evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner failed to address the AAO's prior findings regarding criteria (A) and (F) and did not establish membership in professional associations under criterion (E). The motion repeated prior arguments without new evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-19_02_B5203; source_row=28360 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong because the petitioner failed to meet the first prong, rendering analysis of the remaining prongs moot.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong because the petitioner failed to meet the first prong, rendering analysis of the remaining prongs moot.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-19_02_B5203; source_row=28363 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach the second and third prongs because the petitioner failed to meet the first prong, rendering analysis of the remaining prongs moot.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the second and third prongs because the petitioner failed to meet the first prong, rendering analysis of the remaining prongs moot.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-19_02_B5203; source_row=28362 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Chemistry / Chemical Engineering
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the reference letters summarized the Petitioner's research without showing implementation or impact, the citation record (one paper with 31 cites, others with two or fewer) was not shown to reflect significant interest, the Clarivate and Microsoft Academic percentile analyses were methodologically flawed and not contemporaneous with filing, journal impact factors do not show individual influence, and the record di…
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 reference letters summarized the Petitioner's research without showing implementation or impact, the citation record (one paper with 31 cites, others with two or fewer) was not shown to reflect significant interest, the Clarivate and Microsoft Academic percentile analyses were methodologically flawed and not contemporaneous with filing, journal impact factors do not show individual influence, and the record did not establish the Petitioner's primary role in obtaining grant funding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-18_01_B5203; source_row=28350 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner's role leading graduate students in spacecraft testing did not show impact beyond his university, his contribution of two sections to the consortium document did not establish he was well positioned, his publications garnered minimal non-self citations, and his academic credentials alone were insufficient.…
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 Petitioner's role leading graduate students in spacecraft testing did not show impact beyond his university, his contribution of two sections to the consortium document did not establish he was well positioned, his publications garnered minimal non-self citations, and his academic credentials alone were insufficient. AAO also found the funding evidence did not show the Petitioner (as opposed to his advisor) was mainly responsible for obtaining research funding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-08-16_01_B5203; source_row=28347 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c