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.
AAO concurred with the Director that the Petitioner submitted copies of articles from several different publications, most of which qualify as scholarly, though noting that APA Magazine does not share the hallmarks of peer-reviewed scholarly journals.
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 concurred with the Director that the Petitioner submitted copies of articles from several different publications, most of which qualify as scholarly, though noting that APA Magazine does not share the hallmarks of peer-reviewed scholarly journals.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-28_03_B2203; source_row=25109 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 formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold requirement of three criteria, but noted in passing that the aggregate record does not establish the required 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 formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold requirement of three criteria, but noted in passing that the aggregate record does not establish the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-28_02_B2203; source_row=25103 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
intent to continue work in area of extraordinary ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's volunteer and charitable activities do not constitute employment in a qualifying field, and his intended future employment appears unrelated to his claimed field of philanthropic work. This is an employment-based classification requiring work in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's volunteer and charitable activities do not constitute employment in a qualifying field, and his intended future employment appears unrelated to his claimed field of philanthropic work. This is an employment-based classification requiring work in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-28_01_B2203; source_row=25093 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
PhysicsEngineerPhD
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the record supported both substantial merit and national importance of the Petitioner's proposed research in semiconductor fabrication and lithography, noting letters attesting to its critical importance to multiple U.S. industries and dissemination through journals and conferences.
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 found the record supported both substantial merit and national importance of the Petitioner's proposed research in semiconductor fabrication and lithography, noting letters attesting to its critical importance to multiple U.S. industries and dissemination through journals and conferences.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-28_01_B5203; source_row=25094 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalProfessor118 papers10 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found significant gaps in documentation of education and career history, limited judging significance compared to field leaders, a citation record where the majority of articles were cited 10 times or less, and recommendation letters that made broad unsupported assertions without establishing widespread acclaim.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found significant gaps in documentation of education and career history, limited judging significance compared to field leaders, a citation record where the majority of articles were cited 10 times or less, and recommendation letters that made broad unsupported assertions without establishing widespread acclaim. The Petitioner's achievements, while real, did not rise to the level required for extraordinary ability classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-27_01_B2203; source_row=25089 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
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that competition wins are already covered by the prizes criterion and cannot also satisfy contributions; the coach's letter about distinctive techniques was vague and speculative, with no explanation of how those techniques differed from others or influenced the field; and disqualified results cannot constitute contributions.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that competition wins are already covered by the prizes criterion and cannot also satisfy contributions; the coach's letter about distinctive techniques was vague and speculative, with no explanation of how those techniques differed from others or influenced the field; and disqualified results cannot constitute contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-24_01_B2203; source_row=25073 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director that the criterion was not met, finding that the supporting letter merely repeated regulatory language, failed to identify what outstanding achievements qualified the Petitioner for membership, and relied on an unidentified foreign law to excuse non-production of organizational documents.
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 criterion was not met, finding that the supporting letter merely repeated regulatory language, failed to identify what outstanding achievements qualified the Petitioner for membership, and relied on an unidentified foreign law to excuse non-production of organizational documents.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-24_01_B2203; source_row=25070 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that neither Lelo nor Public Education qualified as major media: Lelo had low circulation (2000–2500 copies) at the lower end of the regional newspaper range per the submitted media study, the survey was of questionable provenance, and Public Education was not a trade publication related to weightlifting or athletics. Additionally, the Lelo articles lacked identified authors as required by the regulation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that neither Lelo nor Public Education qualified as major media: Lelo had low circulation (2000–2500 copies) at the lower end of the regional newspaper range per the submitted media study, the survey was of questionable provenance, and Public Education was not a trade publication related to weightlifting or athletics. Additionally, the Lelo articles lacked identified authors as required by the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2020-01-24_01_B2203; source_row=25071 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c