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.
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that authorship of books qualifies as scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media. Even if books equated to scholarly articles, no evidence was provided to show they were professional or major trade publications. Many of the cited follow-on articles were published after the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility.
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 Petitioner did not demonstrate that authorship of books qualifies as scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media. Even if books equated to scholarly articles, no evidence was provided to show they were professional or major trade publications. Many of the cited follow-on articles were published after the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_01_B2203; source_row=27650 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Bimco Bulletin article was about the employer, not the Petitioner, and evidence was insufficient to corroborate he developed the system. The Coast Guard Forum article similarly lacked evidence attributing key contributions to the Petitioner. The Florida Tech TODAY article was not about the Petitioner. The Foreign Policy article lacked evidence of major media status.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Bimco Bulletin article was about the employer, not the Petitioner, and evidence was insufficient to corroborate he developed the system. The Coast Guard Forum article similarly lacked evidence attributing key contributions to the Petitioner. The Florida Tech TODAY article was not about the Petitioner. The Foreign Policy article lacked evidence of major media status. The ABC7 News document appeared to be a promotional press release from the Petitioner's own company, and likewise lacked major media evidence. The Warlock Asylum interview was published after the petition filing date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_01_B2203; source_row=27647 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Petitioner's research plans vague and contradicted by a later emphasis on clinical practice; treating individual patients and teaching a finite number of students do not have national importance, and the collective importance of the medical profession is insufficient.
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 the Petitioner's research plans vague and contradicted by a later emphasis on clinical practice; treating individual patients and teaching a finite number of students do not have national importance, and the collective importance of the medical profession is insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_02_B5203; source_row=27664 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner's proposed work as a dental surgeon did not rise to national importance: determining best treatment for individual patients is not research with broader impact, a dentist shortage does not make any individual dentist's work nationally important, proposed clinics lacked evidence of national economic scale, and teaching activities amounted only to occasional clinic visits without demonstrated nat…
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 Petitioner's proposed work as a dental surgeon did not rise to national importance: determining best treatment for individual patients is not research with broader impact, a dentist shortage does not make any individual dentist's work nationally important, proposed clinics lacked evidence of national economic scale, and teaching activities amounted only to occasional clinic visits without demonstrated national impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_01_B5203; source_row=27653 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted in advisory dicta that the aggregate record does not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted in advisory dicta that the aggregate record does not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_03_B2203; source_row=27675 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Beneficiary's participation on the national team that won the championship in 1996 was sufficient to satisfy this criterion, even though evidence of other prizes was less persuasive.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Beneficiary's participation on the national team that won the championship in 1996 was sufficient to satisfy this criterion, even though evidence of other prizes was less persuasive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_02_B2203; source_row=27656 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that many articles were primarily about the Beneficiary and his work as a player, and at least some publications qualify as major media. AAO noted the coach vs. player distinction was a separate issue.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that many articles were primarily about the Beneficiary and his work as a player, and at least some publications qualify as major media. AAO noted the coach vs. player distinction was a separate issue.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-05-26_02_B2203; source_row=27658 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c