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 12421–12430
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPhD
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 failed to meet the threshold requirement of at least three criteria, but noted in advisory language 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 failed to meet the threshold requirement of at least three criteria, but noted in advisory language that the record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_07_B2203; source_row=26562 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The 2014 tax return showed net income of only $10,746 and net current assets of $52,738, sufficient only to cover the difference between the proffered wage and wages already paid in 2014. No financial evidence was submitted for 2015 or later years. Gross income arguments were rejected because ability to pay is measured on net income after expenses, not gross receipts.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The 2014 tax return showed net income of only $10,746 and net current assets of $52,738, sufficient only to cover the difference between the proffered wage and wages already paid in 2014. No financial evidence was submitted for 2015 or later years. Gross income arguments were rejected because ability to pay is measured on net income after expenses, not gross receipts. The totality of circumstances also weighed against the Petitioner given its dissolution in 2017 and declining financials.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_01_B5203; source_row=26523 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner satisfies criterion (iv), though the weight of the judging activity was addressed unfavorably at the final merits stage.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner satisfies criterion (iv), though the weight of the judging activity was addressed unfavorably at the final merits stage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_08_B2203; source_row=26565 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other4 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major media
What the decision said
The Petitioner did not contest the Director's conclusion regarding criterion (iii) on appeal, and did not submit or identify any published material naming the Petitioner, so AAO deemed it abandoned.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not contest the Director's conclusion regarding criterion (iii) on appeal, and did not submit or identify any published material naming the Petitioner, so AAO deemed it abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_08_B2203; source_row=26564 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other4 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the Petitioner had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim. His judging was routine and local, his published articles lacked evidence of wide impact or distinguishing recognition, and letters from colleagues and a Governor reflected local prominence rather than national acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the Petitioner had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim. His judging was routine and local, his published articles lacked evidence of wide impact or distinguishing recognition, and letters from colleagues and a Governor reflected local prominence rather than national acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_08_B2203; source_row=26570 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other4 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high remuneration for services
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the Director's conclusion was erroneous because paid leave is not a fringe benefit separate from base salary. The total pay shown on pay receipts was consistent with the salary in the contract, and was substantially higher than the BLS median.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's conclusion was erroneous because paid leave is not a fringe benefit separate from base salary. The total pay shown on pay receipts was consistent with the salary in the contract, and was substantially higher than the BLS median.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_08_B2203; source_row=26569 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The quoted bylaw passage did not include a national recognition requirement, only requiring participation in one film within ten years, which is not an outstanding achievement. Other claimed requirements were unsubstantiated.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The quoted bylaw passage did not include a national recognition requirement, only requiring participation in one film within ten years, which is not an outstanding achievement. Other claimed requirements were unsubstantiated.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_06_B2203; source_row=26548 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO declined to disturb the Director's finding that the Petitioner's work displayed at film festivals satisfies this criterion, while noting it would be revisited in final merits.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to disturb the Director's finding that the Petitioner's work displayed at film festivals satisfies this criterion, while noting it would be revisited in final merits.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_06_B2203; source_row=26551 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion, noting the two judging instances, though flagging limitations in the final merits context.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion, noting the two judging instances, though flagging limitations in the final merits context.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-11-24_06_B2203; source_row=26549 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c