Source-backed decision research

Explore how AAO evaluates evidence.

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.

Clear filters

10,847 decisions / 36,849 findings

Showing 12911300

NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Environment / Energy

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement

What the decision said

AAO declined to reach the third prong because the dispositive failure on the first prong made it unnecessary.

Why this is useful

See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.

View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach the third prong because the dispositive failure on the first prong made it unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-03-03_07_B5203; source_row=43299
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established

Case facts

Electrical / Electronic EngineeringPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO affirms that the Beneficiary's contributions were not shown to be of major significance, finding citation evidence insufficient and the expert letters lacking specific information about field-wide impact. AAO disagrees, however, with the Director's blanket discounting of solicited expert letters and declines to consider new evidence first submitted on appeal.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
AAO affirms that the Beneficiary's contributions were not shown to be of major significance, finding citation evidence insufficient and the expert letters lacking specific information about field-wide impact. AAO disagrees, however, with the Director's blanket discounting of solicited expert letters and declines to consider new evidence first submitted on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=43268
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

Civil / Structural Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO found the record sufficient to show substantial merit but insufficient to establish national importance. Evidence and arguments addressed the importance of the construction industry generally rather than the national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor.…

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 +
The AAO found the record sufficient to show substantial merit but insufficient to establish national importance. Evidence and arguments addressed the importance of the construction industry generally rather than the national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. The expert letter's job creation projections were not supported by documentary evidence and were insufficient to demonstrate substantial positive economic effects commensurate with national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_02_B5203; source_row=43272
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Electrical / Electronic EngineeringPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

participation as a judge of the work of others

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO agrees the record supports the Director's finding that this criterion was met.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO agrees the record supports the Director's finding that this criterion was met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=43266
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Electrical / Electronic EngineeringPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

authorship of scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO agrees the Beneficiary's 14 published articles satisfy this criterion.

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 +
AAO agrees the Beneficiary's 14 published articles satisfy this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=43267
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Mechanical / Manufacturing Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

What the decision said

AAO did not reach a substantive determination on prong one but found the Director's analysis deficient because it failed to reference the evidence or explain how the record led to the conclusion. AAO directed the Director on remand to focus on what the Petitioner will be doing and consider broader implications for the engineering field rather than just the oil and gas industry.

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 +
AAO did not reach a substantive determination on prong one but found the Director's analysis deficient because it failed to reference the evidence or explain how the record led to the conclusion. AAO directed the Director on remand to focus on what the Petitioner will be doing and consider broader implications for the engineering field rather than just the oil and gas industry.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B5203; source_row=43269
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Mechanical / Manufacturing Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement

What the decision said

AAO did not reach this prong and instructed the Director to address it on remand along with the relative decisional weight given to each balancing factor.

Why this is useful

See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.

View full reasoning +
AAO did not reach this prong and instructed the Director to address it on remand along with the relative decisional weight given to each balancing factor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B5203; source_row=43271
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Mechanical / Manufacturing Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

What the decision said

AAO did not reach this prong and instructed the Director to address it on remand.

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO did not reach this prong and instructed the Director to address it on remand.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-28_01_B5203; source_row=43270
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed that the Petitioner established substantial merit because the endeavor falls within recognized areas such as business or technology, but found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. General field-level importance, conclusory assertions, and a business plan projecting local hiring were insufficient; the record did not show broader implications, significant potential to employ 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 +
AAO agreed that the Petitioner established substantial merit because the endeavor falls within recognized areas such as business or technology, but found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. General field-level importance, conclusory assertions, and a business plan projecting local hiring were insufficient; the record did not show broader implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or substantial positive economic effects. Additionally, the cited executive order was revoked, weakening the federal-priority alignment argument.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-27_03_B5203; source_row=43253
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

AAO agreed substantial merit was established but found national importance was not. Petitioner did not show his projections were significant for the industry or that his work would extend beyond his employers, passengers, and trainees to impact the field more broadly. Support letters and industry articles did not demonstrate broader implications.

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 +
AAO agreed substantial merit was established but found national importance was not. Petitioner did not show his projections were significant for the industry or that his work would extend beyond his employers, passengers, and trainees to impact the field more broadly. Support letters and industry articles did not demonstrate broader implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-27_02_B5203; source_row=43250
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment