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 11241–11250
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why the evidence was persuasive
The record includes PowerPoint presentations describing the Petitioner's duties in developing the tool and press releases and letters demonstrating that its development has been critical for the organization, along with documentation establishing its distinguished reputation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record includes PowerPoint presentations describing the Petitioner's duties in developing the tool and press releases and letters demonstrating that its development has been critical for the organization, along with documentation establishing its distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-07_01_B2203; source_row=28018 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why the evidence was persuasive
The employment certification and salary comparison data demonstrate that the Petitioner's base salary is high relative to other senior product managers 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 employment certification and salary comparison data demonstrate that the Petitioner's base salary is high relative to other senior product managers in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-07_01_B2203; source_row=28019 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
AAO did not disturb the Director's finding on this criterion, noting the Director's analysis was generally sufficient to inform the Petitioner why her evidence did not establish major significance. However, AAO noted the Director should refrain from applying a national/international acclaim standard on remand.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO did not disturb the Director's finding on this criterion, noting the Director's analysis was generally sufficient to inform the Petitioner why her evidence did not establish major significance. However, AAO noted the Director should refrain from applying a national/international acclaim standard on remand.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-02_01_B2203; source_row=28011 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
What the decision said
AAO found the Director erroneously conflated criterion (viii) with criterion (v), imposed a 'top of field' standard applicable only at the final merits stage, failed to review an organizational chart already in the record, and entirely ignored the Petitioner's claim regarding her prior employer. AAO remanded for proper re-evaluation under the plain language of the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director erroneously conflated criterion (viii) with criterion (v), imposed a 'top of field' standard applicable only at the final merits stage, failed to review an organizational chart already in the record, and entirely ignored the Petitioner's claim regarding her prior employer. AAO remanded for proper re-evaluation under the plain language of the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-02_01_B2203; source_row=28013 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
labor certification minimum requirements meet advanced degree professional classification
What the decision said
AAO withdraws the Director's interpretation but does not finally resolve the requirements question, remanding for issuance of an RFE for the underlying recruitment advertisements.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdraws the Director's interpretation but does not finally resolve the requirements question, remanding for issuance of an RFE for the underlying recruitment advertisements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-02_01_B5203; source_row=28014 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
On appeal the Petitioner repeated her assertion but did not address the Director's determination. There was no primary evidence of membership in any qualifying association, and no documentation of official membership requirements and member selection procedures establishing that outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts are required.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
On appeal the Petitioner repeated her assertion but did not address the Director's determination. There was no primary evidence of membership in any qualifying association, and no documentation of official membership requirements and member selection procedures establishing that outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts are required.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-01_01_B2203; source_row=27992 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
AAO found the most relevant comparison was to other DGA-covered television directors, not general nationwide averages. Deal memos showed the Petitioner received DGA minimum rates for several projects; agent letters claiming above-scale pay for 2018-2019 were contradicted by other record evidence showing DGA-scale payments.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the most relevant comparison was to other DGA-covered television directors, not general nationwide averages. Deal memos showed the Petitioner received DGA minimum rates for several projects; agent letters claiming above-scale pay for 2018-2019 were contradicted by other record evidence showing DGA-scale payments. The Petitioner did not establish her total remuneration, including residuals, was significantly high compared to similarly employed directors.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-01_01_B2203; source_row=27997 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments
Why AAO was not persuaded
The regulation requires a leading or critical role for an organization or establishment, and the Petitioner failed to show that individual television shows qualify as such. Letters from executives praised her artistic work but did not establish that her role was critical to the success or activities of a production company, network, or other organization as a whole.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The regulation requires a leading or critical role for an organization or establishment, and the Petitioner failed to show that individual television shows qualify as such. Letters from executives praised her artistic work but did not establish that her role was critical to the success or activities of a production company, network, or other organization as a whole.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-01_01_B2203; source_row=27996 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 effectively abandoned this issue on appeal by failing to address the Director's reasons. In any event, the testimonial evidence praised her talent and work quality but did not identify specific original contributions, explain their major significance, or show unusual influence on the overall field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner effectively abandoned this issue on appeal by failing to address the Director's reasons. In any event, the testimonial evidence praised her talent and work quality but did not identify specific original contributions, explain their major significance, or show unusual influence on the overall field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-01_01_B2203; source_row=27995 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
After independent review, AAO confirmed that no submitted article satisfied all requirements: either the article was not about the Petitioner, lacked required author/date information, or was not accompanied by sufficient evidence of publication in a qualifying professional, major trade, or major media outlet.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
After independent review, AAO confirmed that no submitted article satisfied all requirements: either the article was not about the Petitioner, lacked required author/date information, or was not accompanied by sufficient evidence of publication in a qualifying professional, major trade, or major media outlet.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-07-01_01_B2203; source_row=27993 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c