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 13551–13560

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

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO disagreed with the Director, finding that detailed letters from the editor-in-chief established the Petitioner's critical role as co-host of prime time programs, the station's only U.S. correspondent, and its most-read website contributor.

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 Director, finding that detailed letters from the editor-in-chief established the Petitioner's critical role as co-host of prime time programs, the station's only U.S. correspondent, and its most-read website contributor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-10_01_B2203; source_row=25206
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot established

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Membership

membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner's memberships require educational credentials and experience but not outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts. Requirements such as holding a PhD or being in a postdoctoral training program are core professional requirements, not outstanding achievements.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's memberships require educational credentials and experience but not outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts. Requirements such as holding a PhD or being in a postdoctoral training program are core professional requirements, not outstanding achievements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25198
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Membership

membership in qualifying associations

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner did not demonstrate that CPA membership requires achievements rising to the level of 'outstanding,' nor that applicants' achievements are judged by recognized national or international experts. The membership requirements include minimum age, submission of photographic work, an essay, evidence of recognition, and employment verification, but these were not shown to represent outstanding achievement in the field.

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 demonstrate that CPA membership requires achievements rising to the level of 'outstanding,' nor that applicants' achievements are judged by recognized national or international experts. The membership requirements include minimum age, submission of photographic work, an essay, evidence of recognition, and employment verification, but these were not shown to represent outstanding achievement in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_01_B2203; source_row=25188
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The reference letters contained general assertions and hyperbolic language but did not specifically identify original contributions of major significance or demonstrate that the overall field considers the Petitioner's work majorly significant. Exhibition participation and articles similarly did not establish that the Petitioner's work had widely impacted or influenced the field.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The reference letters contained general assertions and hyperbolic language but did not specifically identify original contributions of major significance or demonstrate that the overall field considers the Petitioner's work majorly significant. Exhibition participation and articles similarly did not establish that the Petitioner's work had widely impacted or influenced the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_01_B2203; source_row=25190
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Leading / critical role

leading or critical role for distinguished organization

Why AAO was not persuaded

The evidence did not show how the Petitioner's curator position fits within the overall organizational hierarchy relative to other curators and staff, nor did it sufficiently detail the Petitioner's impact on the organization. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide independent corroboration that the organization has a distinguished reputation, relying primarily on self-promotional website materials.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The evidence did not show how the Petitioner's curator position fits within the overall organizational hierarchy relative to other curators and staff, nor did it sufficiently detail the Petitioner's impact on the organization. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide independent corroboration that the organization has a distinguished reputation, relying primarily on self-promotional website materials.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_01_B2203; source_row=25192
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

authorship of scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (vi) for scholarly articles.

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 +
Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (vi) for scholarly articles.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25201
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

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 threshold of three criteria, though it noted the aggregate record would not support a finding of sustained 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 threshold of three criteria, though it noted the aggregate record would not support a finding of sustained acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25202
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

participation as a judge of the work of others

Why the evidence was persuasive

Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (iv) for judging.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (iv) for judging.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25199
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner's proposed protocol changes were limited to a single institution and lacked evidence of field-wide adoption. Her assay validation work lacked evidence of scope or rarity. Her interference study built on prior work and lacked sufficient evidence of broad impact.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's proposed protocol changes were limited to a single institution and lacked evidence of field-wide adoption. Her assay validation work lacked evidence of scope or rarity. Her interference study built on prior work and lacked sufficient evidence of broad impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25200
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · AwardsNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical EngineeringMaster’s

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Awards

lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards

What the decision said

The Petitioner did not contest the denial of criterion (i) on appeal, and AAO treated the issue as 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 denial of criterion (i) on appeal, and AAO treated the issue as abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-02-07_02_B2203; source_row=25197
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
← Back to assessment