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 11441–11450
NIWNIW · National importanceNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO did not reach the merits of prong one, instead remanding for the Director to evaluate the original medical research endeavor under the Dhanasar framework while disregarding the materially changed RFE-response endeavor.
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 did not reach the merits of prong one, instead remanding for the Director to evaluate the original medical research endeavor under the Dhanasar framework while disregarding the materially changed RFE-response endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-08_02_B5203; source_row=27765 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Mechanical / Manufacturing Engineering
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach the second prong because failure under the first prong was dispositive, and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
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 prong because failure under the first prong was dispositive, and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-08_03_B5203; source_row=27769 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found Petitioner established his senior leadership role with the company and submitted sufficient documentation of the company's distinguished reputation in its industry.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found Petitioner established his senior leadership role with the company and submitted sufficient documentation of the company's distinguished reputation in its industry.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-08_02_B2203; source_row=27760 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
Although AAO disagreed with the Director's basis for disregarding the expert letters, on de novo review the letters and patents lack specifics demonstrating widespread implementation or major impact beyond the company's own customers and operations.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Although AAO disagreed with the Director's basis for disregarding the expert letters, on de novo review the letters and patents lack specifics demonstrating widespread implementation or major impact beyond the company's own customers and operations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-08_02_B2203; source_row=27759 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the three-criterion threshold, but noted in dicta that the record would not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the three-criterion threshold, but noted in dicta that the record would not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-06-08_01_B2203; source_row=27752 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c