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 11981–11990
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 AAO found the letters praised the Petitioner's talents but did not specifically identify original contributions or explain how they significantly impacted or unusually influenced the field. Having a diverse or unique skill set is not itself a contribution of major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the letters praised the Petitioner's talents but did not specifically identify original contributions or explain how they significantly impacted or unusually influenced the field. Having a diverse or unique skill set is not itself a contribution of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27099 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
The AAO declined to accept the W-2 forms submitted for the first time on appeal because the Petitioner had been put on notice of the deficiency and failed to respond. Even if accepted, the salary data shows earnings are competitive and possibly above average nationally, but do not establish a 'high salary' or 'significantly high remuneration' relative to others 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 AAO declined to accept the W-2 forms submitted for the first time on appeal because the Petitioner had been put on notice of the deficiency and failed to respond. Even if accepted, the salary data shows earnings are competitive and possibly above average nationally, but do not establish a 'high salary' or 'significantly high remuneration' relative to others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27102 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the recommendation letters and IMDb profile do not demonstrate display at artistic exhibitions or showcases, and rejected the res judicata argument because the Director's failure to address the criterion in the RFE did not bar an adverse finding in the final decision.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the recommendation letters and IMDb profile do not demonstrate display at artistic exhibitions or showcases, and rejected the res judicata argument because the Director's failure to address the criterion in the RFE did not bar an adverse finding in the final decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27100 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the letters did not demonstrate that the Petitioner's individual or team contributions were of significant importance to the outcome of the organization's activities. The 20% team output figure was not distinguishing, and the letters generally described the role rather than specifically demonstrating a critical performance within the organization.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the letters did not demonstrate that the Petitioner's individual or team contributions were of significant importance to the outcome of the organization's activities. The 20% team output figure was not distinguishing, and the letters generally described the role rather than specifically demonstrating a critical performance within the organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27101 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO rejected the res judicata argument for the same reasons as criterion vii, found the Petitioner did not explain how existing evidence meets the criterion, and found the comparable evidence argument unavailing because the Petitioner had consistently claimed he could meet at least four criteria without comparable evidence and did not demonstrate why he could not offer evidence meeting at least three criteria.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO rejected the res judicata argument for the same reasons as criterion vii, found the Petitioner did not explain how existing evidence meets the criterion, and found the comparable evidence argument unavailing because the Petitioner had consistently claimed he could meet at least four criteria without comparable evidence and did not demonstrate why he could not offer evidence meeting at least three criteria.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27103 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 explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the step-1 threshold of at least three criteria, though it noted in dicta the record does not show the required acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the step-1 threshold of at least three criteria, though it noted in dicta the record does not show the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27104 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published materials in major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
The AAO found that articles published by the Indonesian daily newspapers Kompas and The Jakarta Post met all elements of the criterion, being about the Petitioner and his work, including required title/date/author, and supported by sufficient evidence that these publications qualify as major media in the Indonesian market.
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 articles published by the Indonesian daily newspapers Kompas and The Jakarta Post met all elements of the criterion, being about the Petitioner and his work, including required title/date/author, and supported by sufficient evidence that these publications qualify as major media in the Indonesian market.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_03_B2203; source_row=27098 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPhysician1,500 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Beneficiary's foundational published research, ~1500 citations, pioneering contributions to underwater instrumentation and measurement techniques, leadership founding and chairing a major international conference series, frequent invited presentations at international conferences worldwide, and senior leadership role at a uniquely positioned industry-leading company cumulatively established sustained accl…
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 foundational published research, ~1500 citations, pioneering contributions to underwater instrumentation and measurement techniques, leadership founding and chairing a major international conference series, frequent invited presentations at international conferences worldwide, and senior leadership role at a uniquely positioned industry-leading company cumulatively established sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing. AAO also rejected the Director's unfavorable comparison of the Beneficiary's citation record to academic researchers, noting the private sector context.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_02_B2203; source_row=27097 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c