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.
The Petitioner provided evidence that he judged the work of others in his field as a member of juries for multiple international film festivals and short film and screenwriting competitions.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner provided evidence that he judged the work of others in his field as a member of juries for multiple international film festivals and short film and screenwriting competitions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-05_01_B2203; source_row=24808 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The plaques were internal faculty awards or conference-participation recognitions. The Petitioner did not show they were nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence. The reputation of the awarding institution does not by itself confer national or international recognition on honors it bestows on its own employees.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The plaques were internal faculty awards or conference-participation recognitions. The Petitioner did not show they were nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence. The reputation of the awarding institution does not by itself confer national or international recognition on honors it bestows on its own employees. The SPA certificate was not shown to be nationally recognized, and the patient safety nomination was not a prize or award won.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_01_B2203; source_row=24794 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical20 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's participation in large GBD collaborations (with hundreds of co-authors) was not itself an original contribution, and he did not identify his specific contributions to those articles. The ResearchGate scores lacked context and did not identify any original contribution.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's participation in large GBD collaborations (with hundreds of co-authors) was not itself an original contribution, and he did not identify his specific contributions to those articles. The ResearchGate scores lacked context and did not identify any original contribution. The DNA registry was not shown to be original given similar registries existed elsewhere, and the EHR implementation applied existing methods in a new location rather than constituting an original contribution. Colleague letters attested to introduction of existing methods to Saudi Arabia but did not establish major significance in the field as a whole.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_01_B2203; source_row=24796 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the written works did not qualify as 'scholarly articles' because they lacked footnotes, endnotes, or bibliographies and appeared to be between one and three pages long. Additionally, the publications had very limited circulation and the Petitioner failed to demonstrate they qualified as professional, major trade, or major media publications.
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 found the written works did not qualify as 'scholarly articles' because they lacked footnotes, endnotes, or bibliographies and appeared to be between one and three pages long. Additionally, the publications had very limited circulation and the Petitioner failed to demonstrate they qualified as professional, major trade, or major media publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_02_B2203; source_row=24802 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the letters did not establish that the Petitioner participated as 'a judge' in the formal sense required by the regulation. The undated statement lacked specificity and there was no primary documentary evidence of the Petitioner's participation as a judge, nor evidence of the specific artworks or artists evaluated.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the letters did not establish that the Petitioner participated as 'a judge' in the formal sense required by the regulation. The undated statement lacked specificity and there was no primary documentary evidence of the Petitioner's participation as a judge, nor evidence of the specific artworks or artists evaluated.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_02_B2203; source_row=24800 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical20 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold evidentiary criteria, but noted in dicta that the record did not support 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 reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold evidentiary criteria, but noted in dicta that the record did not support sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_01_B2203; source_row=24798 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
One year of qualifying experience as required by labor certification
Why the evidence was persuasive
The experience letters in the record established the Beneficiary's over one year of qualifying experience in seismic imaging, satisfying the labor certification requirement as of the priority date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The experience letters in the record established the Beneficiary's over one year of qualifying experience in seismic imaging, satisfying the labor certification requirement as of the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_02_B5203; source_row=24805 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 the reference letters were too general and conclusory, failing to explain specifically how the Petitioner's work impacted the field in a major or significant way. There was no evidence that his techniques were widely used by others in the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the reference letters were too general and conclusory, failing to explain specifically how the Petitioner's work impacted the field in a major or significant way. There was no evidence that his techniques were widely used by others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_02_B2203; source_row=24801 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner met the display criterion, citing diplomas from the Mayor and the Head of the Regional Department of the Uzbekistan Chamber of Commerce and Industry showing he exhibited his embroidery at municipal and regional level competitions.
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 Petitioner met the display criterion, citing diplomas from the Mayor and the Head of the Regional Department of the Uzbekistan Chamber of Commerce and Industry showing he exhibited his embroidery at municipal and regional level competitions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-12-04_02_B2203; source_row=24803 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c