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.
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherProfessor
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold of three criteria, though AAO noted in an advisory comment that the aggregate record would 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 explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold of three criteria, though AAO noted in an advisory comment that the aggregate record would not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_02_B2203; source_row=25477 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
What the decision said
AAO found that the Petitioner effectively abandoned this issue on appeal by maintaining the claim without elaboration, and declined to further address it.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Petitioner effectively abandoned this issue on appeal by maintaining the claim without elaboration, and declined to further address it.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_04_B2203; source_row=25485 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
AAO found that the submitted materials do not satisfy the standard because they mention the Petitioner only briefly or identify him without pertaining to his work. AAO also noted the Petitioner misquoted Muni v. INS, and the case does not support the proposition advanced.
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 submitted materials do not satisfy the standard because they mention the Petitioner only briefly or identify him without pertaining to his work. AAO also noted the Petitioner misquoted Muni v. INS, and the case does not support the proposition advanced.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-30_04_B2203; source_row=25484 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Publication on a university institutional repository with no apparent selection process does not amount to publication in a professional journal or other 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 +
Publication on a university institutional repository with no apparent selection process does not amount to publication in a professional journal or other major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=25459 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's salary is well below the prevailing wage for music directors and composers, and clergy wages are not an appropriate comparison for his 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 salary is well below the prevailing wage for music directors and composers, and clergy wages are not an appropriate comparison for his field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=25461 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters praise the Petitioner's skills but do not show his contributions have widely influenced the field or otherwise risen to major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The letters praise the Petitioner's skills but do not show his contributions have widely influenced the field or otherwise risen to major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=25458 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although the Petitioner documented receipt of the award, the supporting evidence is insufficient to show it is a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Although the Petitioner documented receipt of the award, the supporting evidence is insufficient to show it is a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=25456 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters do not describe in sufficient detail how the Petitioner's role was leading or critical, and a program or class is not an 'organization or establishment.'
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The letters do not describe in sufficient detail how the Petitioner's role was leading or critical, and a program or class is not an 'organization or establishment.'
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=25460 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c