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 12521–12530
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner performed in key design roles for major footwear brands with distinguished reputations.
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 Petitioner performed in key design roles for major footwear brands with distinguished reputations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-06_01_B2203; source_row=26432 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
final merits determination - sustained acclaim and top of field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO concluded that high citation counts, without qualitative context showing how others applied the work, did not demonstrate top-of-field standing; reference letters were conclusory about impact; the Beneficiary's role at the petitioner was not shown to be critical; and his peer review work for prestigious venues did not by itself confer acclaim.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded that high citation counts, without qualitative context showing how others applied the work, did not demonstrate top-of-field standing; reference letters were conclusory about impact; the Beneficiary's role at the petitioner was not shown to be critical; and his peer review work for prestigious venues did not by itself confer acclaim. AAO rejected the petitioner's claim that the Director applied novel standards, explaining the Director's observations belonged to the final merits inquiry under Kazarian.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_03_B2203; source_row=26400 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that background information on the competitions did not establish that the prizes are nationally or internationally recognized. The youth competition was limited to ages 15-25, excluding experienced artists, and prizes included academic scholarships. No evidence showed the prizes attracted significant notice among the public or field practitioners.
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 background information on the competitions did not establish that the prizes are nationally or internationally recognized. The youth competition was limited to ages 15-25, excluding experienced artists, and prizes included academic scholarships. No evidence showed the prizes attracted significant notice among the public or field practitioners.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_06_B2203; source_row=26410 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The submitted letters merely repeat regulatory language without explaining the Petitioner's specific achievements. The charter itself was not submitted. The near-identical letters raised credibility concerns. The organization has 15,000 members suggesting non-selective membership, and the membership card was issued by a regional rather than national authority.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The submitted letters merely repeat regulatory language without explaining the Petitioner's specific achievements. The charter itself was not submitted. The near-identical letters raised credibility concerns. The organization has 15,000 members suggesting non-selective membership, and the membership card was issued by a regional rather than national authority.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_06_B2203; source_row=26411 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the submitted writing had traits of popular rather than scholarly writing, was not shown to have been subject to peer review or editorial scrutiny, and the Petitioner did not establish that the publications constitute professional or major trade publications or major media.
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 AAO found the submitted writing had traits of popular rather than scholarly writing, was not shown to have been subject to peer review or editorial scrutiny, and the Petitioner did not establish that the publications constitute professional or major trade publications or major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_06_B2203; source_row=26414 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The magazine piece was written by the Petitioner rather than about him. The newspapers had very small circulations (around 500 and 1,150 copies per week). YouTube videos had very few views (22–66 each). One video was also post-filing and thus could not establish eligibility as of the filing date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The magazine piece was written by the Petitioner rather than about him. The newspapers had very small circulations (around 500 and 1,150 copies per week). YouTube videos had very few views (22–66 each). One video was also post-filing and thus could not establish eligibility as of the filing date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_06_B2203; source_row=26412 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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 Petitioner's argument was vague and general, and he failed to show how improving his country's rankings constitutes an original athletic contribution. Skill and success are not intrinsically original contributions.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's argument was vague and general, and he failed to show how improving his country's rankings constitutes an original athletic contribution. Skill and success are not intrinsically original contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_08_B2203; source_row=26422 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
Many submitted articles were not about the Petitioner specifically, coverage by major outlets was very brief and event-focused rather than about the Petitioner, one article had only a partial translation, and other more substantive coverage did not appear in qualifying major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Many submitted articles were not about the Petitioner specifically, coverage by major outlets was very brief and event-focused rather than about the Petitioner, one article had only a partial translation, and other more substantive coverage did not appear in qualifying major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_08_B2203; source_row=26421 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the media articles were about the research and its conclusions and implications, not about the Petitioner himself. Articles that are not about the petitioner do not meet this regulatory criterion.
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 media articles were about the research and its conclusions and implications, not about the Petitioner himself. Articles that are not about the petitioner do not meet this regulatory criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_01_B2203; source_row=26388 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Biomedical / Life Sciences40 papers3 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the reference letters to be of diminished evidentiary value due to their strikingly similar structure and language, suggesting the Petitioner was the source of their content.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the reference letters to be of diminished evidentiary value due to their strikingly similar structure and language, suggesting the Petitioner was the source of their content. The letters and citation data failed to specifically explain how the Petitioner's contributions were of major significance, instead relying on journal prestige, media coverage, and general citation counts without demonstrating concrete impact on the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-10-05_01_B2203; source_row=26390 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c