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 11811–11820
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
The three recommendation letters spoke to the Petitioner's skills and personal traits but did not identify original contributions or explain the unusual influence of his artwork on the overall field. Having a unique skill set alone is not a contribution of major significance, and the letters were insufficiently specific and relied on hyperbolic language.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The three recommendation letters spoke to the Petitioner's skills and personal traits but did not identify original contributions or explain the unusual influence of his artwork on the overall field. Having a unique skill set alone is not a contribution of major significance, and the letters were insufficiently specific and relied on hyperbolic language. Artwork samples showed originality but did not establish major significance or impact on the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_01_B2203; source_row=27292 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated 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 AAO was not persuaded
The translation of one article conflicted with other evidence and lacked a required author, rendering it unreliable. The regional newspapers were not shown to qualify as professional or major trade publications or major media, as the Petitioner provided only self-promotional letters from editors without independent objective evidence of their standing. Post-filing evidence was also excluded.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The translation of one article conflicted with other evidence and lacked a required author, rendering it unreliable. The regional newspapers were not shown to qualify as professional or major trade publications or major media, as the Petitioner provided only self-promotional letters from editors without independent objective evidence of their standing. Post-filing evidence was also excluded.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_01_B2203; source_row=27291 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated 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 AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the articles lacked required author information and additionally found the Director was incorrect that Midi Libre qualified as major media, since the Petitioner provided no comparative statistics or supporting documentation to demonstrate the publication's standing as a major medium in France.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the articles lacked required author information and additionally found the Director was incorrect that Midi Libre qualified as major media, since the Petitioner provided no comparative statistics or supporting documentation to demonstrate the publication's standing as a major medium in France.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_02_B2203; source_row=27296 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
The recommendation letters provided only general job descriptions rather than specific information demonstrating how the Beneficiary performed in a critical role and contributed to the organization's outcomes. New arguments and documents regarding the Beneficiary's narrowed role at a university research project were not considered because they were first raised on appeal.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The recommendation letters provided only general job descriptions rather than specific information demonstrating how the Beneficiary performed in a critical role and contributed to the organization's outcomes. New arguments and documents regarding the Beneficiary's narrowed role at a university research project were not considered because they were first raised on appeal. The letters discussing the university role did not explain how the Beneficiary's contributions resulted in essential or crucial outcomes for the organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_03_B2203; source_row=27303 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other35 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that two patents, while demonstrating originality, did not establish major significance in the field because recommendation letters were largely conclusory, referenced only potential future impact, and did not show widespread implementation or influence beyond testing stages at the petitioning company. AAO also declined to consider new patent citation evidence first raised on appeal under Matter of Soriano.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that two patents, while demonstrating originality, did not establish major significance in the field because recommendation letters were largely conclusory, referenced only potential future impact, and did not show widespread implementation or influence beyond testing stages at the petitioning company. AAO also declined to consider new patent citation evidence first raised on appeal under Matter of Soriano. AAO agreed with the outcome but criticized the Director's improper use of cumulative citation comparisons for this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_03_B2203; source_row=27301 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 step-one threshold of at least three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record would 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 step-one threshold of at least three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_01_B2203; source_row=27295 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1Aprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
procedural or other
motion to reopen requirements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The new documents predated the petition's filing but the Petitioner did not explain why she failed to submit them before the Director, so AAO declined to consider them under Matter of Soriano.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The new documents predated the petition's filing but the Petitioner did not explain why she failed to submit them before the Director, so AAO declined to consider them under Matter of Soriano.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_05_B2203; source_row=27307 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 reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy three criteria at step one, but noted in dicta that the aggregate record does not show sustained acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of her field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy three criteria at step one, but noted in dicta that the aggregate record does not show sustained acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of her field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-04-05_02_B2203; source_row=27299 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c