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.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 1411–1420
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish national importance because he failed to show he would employ a significant population, that the operating area is economically depressed, or that his endeavor would yield substantial positive economic effects. Projections of 32 employees and ~$2.78M in fifth-year sales were insufficient, and no sufficiently direct evidentiary tie to the claimed economic results was provided.
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 Petitioner did not establish national importance because he failed to show he would employ a significant population, that the operating area is economically depressed, or that his endeavor would yield substantial positive economic effects. Projections of 32 employees and ~$2.78M in fifth-year sales were insufficient, and no sufficiently direct evidentiary tie to the claimed economic results was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_05_B5203; source_row=43070 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would be limited to her clients and would not have a broader impact on the healthcare field. Expert opinion letters were considered but did not support the claim of national importance of her specific proposed endeavor.
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 that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would be limited to her clients and would not have a broader impact on the healthcare field. Expert opinion letters were considered but did not support the claim of national importance of her specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_15_B5203; source_row=43084 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
The AAO noted the Petitioner's prior experience was relevant to prong 2 but did not reach a separate determination on this prong given the failure at prong 1.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
The AAO noted the Petitioner's prior experience was relevant to prong 2 but did not reach a separate determination on this prong given the failure at prong 1.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_06_B5203; source_row=43074 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the new evidence demonstrated the importance of the food insecurity/grocery industry broadly, but did not establish the prospective national-level impact of the Petitioner's specific endeavor. Nonprofit letters showed interest in collaboration and local community impact but did not explain how the endeavor would lead to broader implications beyond immediate customers.
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 +
The AAO found the new evidence demonstrated the importance of the food insecurity/grocery industry broadly, but did not establish the prospective national-level impact of the Petitioner's specific endeavor. Nonprofit letters showed interest in collaboration and local community impact but did not explain how the endeavor would lead to broader implications beyond immediate customers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_06_B5203; source_row=43073 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
performing in leading or critical roles for distinguished organizations
What the decision said
Because the Petitioner did not address or contest the Director's conclusion on this criterion on appeal, AAO deemed it waived and declined to consider new evidence on motion under this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because the Petitioner did not address or contest the Director's conclusion on this criterion on appeal, AAO deemed it waived and declined to consider new evidence on motion under this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_01_B2203; source_row=43042 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO found the Director provided no analysis whatsoever of the third prong, making it impossible to evaluate the conclusion. AAO remanded for full analysis.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director provided no analysis whatsoever of the third prong, making it impossible to evaluate the conclusion. AAO remanded for full analysis.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-02-13_12_B5203; source_row=43083 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c