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.
Possession of Advanced Degree or Foreign Equivalent
Why AAO was not persuaded
The FCCPT evaluation included coursework beyond the Beneficiary's Indian master's degree, meaning it established equivalence rather than a foreign equivalent degree. The Petitioner also did not claim the Beneficiary has five or more years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience. AAO remanded for the Director to properly analyze this issue.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The FCCPT evaluation included coursework beyond the Beneficiary's Indian master's degree, meaning it established equivalence rather than a foreign equivalent degree. The Petitioner also did not claim the Beneficiary has five or more years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience. AAO remanded for the Director to properly analyze this issue.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_01_B5203; source_row=24767 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
The AAO declined to formally conduct the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial threshold, but noted in the alternative that the record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO declined to formally conduct the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial threshold, but noted in the alternative that the record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_02_B2203; source_row=24773 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found a 2008 article in Vogue Brasil about the Petitioner and her modeling work, along with evidence that Vogue Brasil is a major medium, sufficient to satisfy this criterion. AAO explicitly disagreed with the Director.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found a 2008 article in Vogue Brasil about the Petitioner and her modeling work, along with evidence that Vogue Brasil is a major medium, sufficient to satisfy this criterion. AAO explicitly disagreed with the Director.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_03_B2203; source_row=24775 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
What the decision said
The AAO found the Director mischaracterized the record (treating a nomination as a win) and inaccurately stated 'no evidence' was submitted, ignoring documentation about awarding entities and several wins; remanded for full analysis.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the Director mischaracterized the record (treating a nomination as a win) and inaccurately stated 'no evidence' was submitted, ignoring documentation about awarding entities and several wins; remanded for full analysis.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_01_B2203; source_row=24762 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
What the decision said
The AAO could not tell whether the Director considered the RFE-response letters from company representatives, which addressed the organizations rather than just the productions, and remanded for that reason.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO could not tell whether the Director considered the RFE-response letters from company representatives, which addressed the organizations rather than just the productions, and remanded for that reason.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_01_B2203; source_row=24764 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner in professional or major trade publications or other major media
What the decision said
The AAO found the Director's analysis internally contradictory and inadequate because it referenced no specific publication among 30+ exhibits, and noted that at least some Turkish media articles such as those in Hurriyet were in fact about the Petitioner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the Director's analysis internally contradictory and inadequate because it referenced no specific publication among 30+ exhibits, and noted that at least some Turkish media articles such as those in Hurriyet were in fact about the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_01_B2203; source_row=24763 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Director's basis for denial was incorrect — the regulation does not require a complete description of job or degree requirements — and remanded for proper analysis of whether headquarters posting was sufficient given the itinerant nature of the position.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's basis for denial was incorrect — the regulation does not require a complete description of job or degree requirements — and remanded for proper analysis of whether headquarters posting was sufficient given the itinerant nature of the position.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-11-27_01_B5203; source_row=24766 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c