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 11991–12000
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPhysician1,500 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why the evidence was persuasive
The Beneficiary held senior leadership and scientific roles with the petitioning company, which has a distinguished reputation as the only manufacturer of certain portable underwater instrumentation used globally.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Beneficiary held senior leadership and scientific roles with the petitioning company, which has a distinguished reputation as the only manufacturer of certain portable underwater instrumentation used globally.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_02_B2203; source_row=27095 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPhysician1,500 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
What the decision said
AAO considered the original contributions evidence as part of the final merits determination rather than deciding the criterion separately, since the three-criteria threshold was already met.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO considered the original contributions evidence as part of the final merits determination rather than deciding the criterion separately, since the three-criteria threshold was already met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_02_B2203; source_row=27096 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Director found the Petitioner submitted only published books, which are not scholarly articles, and found no search results for one book. The AAO agreed books are not scholarly articles but found the Director failed to consider two journal/magazine articles the Petitioner submitted under this criterion. The matter is remanded for proper evaluation.
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 Director found the Petitioner submitted only published books, which are not scholarly articles, and found no search results for one book. The AAO agreed books are not scholarly articles but found the Director failed to consider two journal/magazine articles the Petitioner submitted under this criterion. The matter is remanded for proper evaluation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_01_B2203; source_row=27091 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO remanded without reaching a conclusion on this criterion, noting the Director's analysis was undermined by failure to consider NOID response evidence including supplemental recommendation letters.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO remanded without reaching a conclusion on this criterion, noting the Director's analysis was undermined by failure to consider NOID response evidence including supplemental recommendation letters.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-03-01_01_B2203; source_row=27092 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although the Petitioner articulated an intention to provide active shooter consulting services to houses of worship, he did not provide sufficient evidence that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. The record did not show the endeavor would extend beyond his employer or future clientele to impact his field or U.S.…
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 +
Although the Petitioner articulated an intention to provide active shooter consulting services to houses of worship, he did not provide sufficient evidence that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. The record did not show the endeavor would extend beyond his employer or future clientele to impact his field or U.S. security interests more broadly, and he failed to demonstrate significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_03_B5203; source_row=27042 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
commanded salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's 2019 job offer and pay statements post-dated the petition filing and could not be considered. The remaining earnings documentation did not show that his salary was indicative of exceptional ability 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 Petitioner's 2019 job offer and pay statements post-dated the petition filing and could not be considered. The remaining earnings documentation did not show that his salary was indicative of exceptional ability relative to others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_03_B5203; source_row=27039 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 Petitioner submitted a 2017 W-2 from a prior employer without identifying the relevant position, and compared the Beneficiary's SAP consultant salary to salaries for installation, maintenance, and repair workers rather than to other SAP consultants. No evidence of the claimed 2018 earnings was provided.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted a 2017 W-2 from a prior employer without identifying the relevant position, and compared the Beneficiary's SAP consultant salary to salaries for installation, maintenance, and repair workers rather than to other SAP consultants. No evidence of the claimed 2018 earnings was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_07_B2203; source_row=27073 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
The screenshots credited awards to the employer corporation, not to the Beneficiary personally. The High Mileage Award certificate named the Beneficiary but the Petitioner failed to demonstrate its national or international recognition for excellence in the field beyond ALL itself.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The screenshots credited awards to the employer corporation, not to the Beneficiary personally. The High Mileage Award certificate named the Beneficiary but the Petitioner failed to demonstrate its national or international recognition for excellence in the field beyond ALL itself.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_07_B2203; source_row=27069 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
ASME 'Member' status requires only eight years of engineering experience, not outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. Membership based solely on years of experience does not rise to the level required by the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
ASME 'Member' status requires only eight years of engineering experience, not outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. Membership based solely on years of experience does not rise to the level required by the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_07_B2203; source_row=27070 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director that the Beneficiary failed the final merits determination. The evidence — recommendation letters, patents, limited publications with 22 citations, a single award, and participation in one forum and one working group — all focused on the Beneficiary's recent work with the Petitioner and did not establish a career of acclaimed work or place the Beneficiary among the small percentage at the very t…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Beneficiary failed the final merits determination. The evidence — recommendation letters, patents, limited publications with 22 citations, a single award, and participation in one forum and one working group — all focused on the Beneficiary's recent work with the Petitioner and did not establish a career of acclaimed work or place the Beneficiary among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2021-02-26_03_B2203; source_row=27037 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c