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 11311–11320
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot established
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesPostdoctoral Researcher
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Membership
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that neither the Petitioner's ACS complimentary membership (awarded for completing two or more reviews) nor his claimed INEF membership established that membership requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that neither the Petitioner's ACS complimentary membership (awarded for completing two or more reviews) nor his claimed INEF membership established that membership requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. ACS membership was not shown to require outstanding achievements, and INEF membership/elite designation based on Olympiad placements approved by the Ministry of Education was not shown to be judged by recognized national or international experts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_02_B2203; source_row=27923 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The 2020 competition judging post-dated the June 2018 filing; the letter did not show the Petitioner actually completed judging tasks; the historical judging letter lacked dates, names of those judged, and specific assessments; no corroborating documentation was provided for any judging activity.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The 2020 competition judging post-dated the June 2018 filing; the letter did not show the Petitioner actually completed judging tasks; the historical judging letter lacked dates, names of those judged, and specific assessments; no corroborating documentation was provided for any judging activity.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=27907 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The supporting letter for the Union of Designers of USSR lacked specificity about outstanding achievement requirements and expert judging; documentation for other organizations did not confirm membership or membership criteria; being selected as a costume designer does not equate to association membership; comparable evidence argument failed because the Petitioner did not show why three criteria could not be met.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The supporting letter for the Union of Designers of USSR lacked specificity about outstanding achievement requirements and expert judging; documentation for other organizations did not confirm membership or membership criteria; being selected as a costume designer does not equate to association membership; comparable evidence argument failed because the Petitioner did not show why three criteria could not be met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=27905 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
Many articles did not mention the Petitioner and were therefore not about her; those that mentioned her were not substantively about her or her work; one article was post-filing; some articles lacked required author or date information; circulation evidence for Cosmopolitan.com and Thedailybeast.com and the Marie Clare Russia article were submitted for the first time on appeal after being put on notice by the RFE and could…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Many articles did not mention the Petitioner and were therefore not about her; those that mentioned her were not substantively about her or her work; one article was post-filing; some articles lacked required author or date information; circulation evidence for Cosmopolitan.com and Thedailybeast.com and the Marie Clare Russia article were submitted for the first time on appeal after being put on notice by the RFE and could not be considered.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=27906 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The article translation did not identify the Petitioner as author; the article was not scholarly in nature but a popular general-interest article; the publication's cover indicated it was intended for the general public rather than learned persons in the field; no evidence established Stas Russia as a professional trade publication or major medium.
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 article translation did not identify the Petitioner as author; the article was not scholarly in nature but a popular general-interest article; the publication's cover indicated it was intended for the general public rather than learned persons in the field; no evidence established Stas Russia as a professional trade publication or major medium.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=27909 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 in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
Letters praised the Petitioner's skill but lacked specific examples of field-wide impact; contributions appeared limited to individual clients rather than the field at large; reference letters used hyperbolic language without specificity; the comparative argument to the Hall of Fame inductee did not show equivalent field-wide influence.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Letters praised the Petitioner's skill but lacked specific examples of field-wide impact; contributions appeared limited to individual clients rather than the field at large; reference letters used hyperbolic language without specificity; the comparative argument to the Hall of Fame inductee did not show equivalent field-wide influence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=27908 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / ManagementManager
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
On balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO explicitly reserved prong three as unnecessary to reach given the dispositive findings against the Petitioner on the underlying classification and prongs one and two.
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 reserved prong three as unnecessary to reach given the dispositive findings against the Petitioner on the underlying classification and prongs one and two.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B5203; source_row=27921 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / ManagementManager
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
Substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner provided no estimates of jobs to be created, no specifics on the volume of affordable housing, no explanation of how locally-sourced materials would have national impact, no differentiation from existing construction techniques, and no copies of feasibility studies. Geographic references to California, Texas, and Maryland were not specific enough to establish national scope.
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 no estimates of jobs to be created, no specifics on the volume of affordable housing, no explanation of how locally-sourced materials would have national impact, no differentiation from existing construction techniques, and no copies of feasibility studies. Geographic references to California, Texas, and Maryland were not specific enough to establish national scope.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B5203; source_row=27919 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Official academic record relating to area of exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not submit his academic record and failed to sufficiently connect his Bachelor of Laws to his claimed area of exceptional ability in business development and entrepreneurship.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not submit his academic record and failed to sufficiently connect his Bachelor of Laws to his claimed area of exceptional ability in business development and entrepreneurship.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B5203; source_row=27913 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters of recommendation contained generalized, conclusory statements and did not identify specific contributions to the field. Philanthropic recognition was local and unrelated to business industry recognition. The Petitioner also failed to substantiate claims of developing new building technology.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The letters of recommendation contained generalized, conclusory statements and did not identify specific contributions to the field. Philanthropic recognition was local and unrelated to business industry recognition. The Petitioner also failed to substantiate claims of developing new building technology.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-25_01_B5203; source_row=27918 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c