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 13311–13320
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherProfessor
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while letters attested to significant contributions, they provided few details and little explanation of how the work was significant. Evidence of impact was limited to a specific region or a small number of companies or institutions, and the conference invitation postdated the filing.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while letters attested to significant contributions, they provided few details and little explanation of how the work was significant. Evidence of impact was limited to a specific region or a small number of companies or institutions, and the conference invitation postdated the filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_02_B2203; source_row=25472 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherProfessor
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the articles were all published after the petition's filing date and therefore cannot establish eligibility as of the date of filing. Additionally, the articles shared similar content, tone, and photographs with no named authors, leading AAO to conclude they likely derived from a press release rather than independent coverage.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the articles were all published after the petition's filing date and therefore cannot establish eligibility as of the date of filing. Additionally, the articles shared similar content, tone, and photographs with no named authors, leading AAO to conclude they likely derived from a press release rather than independent coverage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_02_B2203; source_row=25470 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherProfessor
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high remuneration for services
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found no proper comparator data was provided, the accountant failed to identify the relevant field or provide comparative figures, and the Petitioner's judicial salary—which exceeded her writing income—was not the type of work she intended to perform in the United States.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found no proper comparator data was provided, the accountant failed to identify the relevant field or provide comparative figures, and the Petitioner's judicial salary—which exceeded her writing income—was not the type of work she intended to perform in the United States.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_02_B2203; source_row=25476 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the letters from organizations insufficient to show a leading or critical role and that the Petitioner failed to establish the organizations had distinguished reputations relative to other entities of the same kind. The leading/critical framing for judicial and teaching roles was raised for the first time on appeal.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the letters from organizations insufficient to show a leading or critical role and that the Petitioner failed to establish the organizations had distinguished reputations relative to other entities of the same kind. The leading/critical framing for judicial and teaching roles was raised for the first time on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_02_B2203; source_row=25475 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while the eligibility pools for the two awards were national and international respectively, national or international availability is not the same as national or international recognition. The Petitioner failed to submit independent, objective evidence establishing the awards' recognition.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the eligibility pools for the two awards were national and international respectively, national or international availability is not the same as national or international recognition. The Petitioner failed to submit independent, objective evidence establishing the awards' recognition.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_04_B2203; source_row=25483 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO disagreed with the Petitioner's characterization of the Director's reasoning, finding the Director did not impose a new requirement. AAO also found the company's distinguished reputation was not established by objective evidence, and that the Petitioner's roles for clients and charities were not shown to be critical rather than merely helpful.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO disagreed with the Petitioner's characterization of the Director's reasoning, finding the Director did not impose a new requirement. AAO also found the company's distinguished reputation was not established by objective evidence, and that the Petitioner's roles for clients and charities were not shown to be critical rather than merely helpful.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_04_B2203; source_row=25487 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 reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three evidentiary criteria, making a full final merits analysis unnecessary. AAO noted in an advisory remark that the aggregate record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three evidentiary criteria, making a full final merits analysis unnecessary. AAO noted in an advisory remark that the aggregate record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_03_B2203; source_row=25482 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
The only qualifying publication, Asahi Shimbun, featured the Petitioner only as one of several symposium participants quoted in an article about corporate venture capital generally; the Petitioner's brief comments were insufficient to satisfy the regulatory requirement that the material be about the alien.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The only qualifying publication, Asahi Shimbun, featured the Petitioner only as one of several symposium participants quoted in an article about corporate venture capital generally; the Petitioner's brief comments were insufficient to satisfy the regulatory requirement that the material be about the alien.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_01_B2203; source_row=25463 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c