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 14441–14450
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner compared his creative director salary to graphic designer salaries rather than to other creative directors, making the comparison inapposite. Even using national average data for creative directors from payscale.com, the Petitioner's salary was near the 75th percentile, not demonstrating a high salary in relation to other creative directors.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner compared his creative director salary to graphic designer salaries rather than to other creative directors, making the comparison inapposite. Even using national average data for creative directors from payscale.com, the Petitioner's salary was near the 75th percentile, not demonstrating a high salary in relation to other creative directors.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24204 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
While the Petitioner's portfolio demonstrates originality, he did not show how his designs have been of major significance in the field. Letters were either too general, used identical language raising questions about independent preparation, or merely repeated regulatory language without providing specific evidence of impact in the overall field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
While the Petitioner's portfolio demonstrates originality, he did not show how his designs have been of major significance in the field. Letters were either too general, used identical language raising questions about independent preparation, or merely repeated regulatory language without providing specific evidence of impact in the overall field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24202 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The awards were received by the Petitioner's employer, not the Petitioner individually. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide objective corroborating evidence of the national or international recognition of any awards for excellence 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 awards were received by the Petitioner's employer, not the Petitioner individually. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide objective corroborating evidence of the national or international recognition of any awards for excellence in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24198 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner provided background screenshots about ADC and AIGA but did not provide the membership requirements demonstrating that membership requires outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner provided background screenshots about ADC and AIGA but did not provide the membership requirements demonstrating that membership requires outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24199 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The submitted screenshots were about branding, marketing, and design projects for various companies rather than published material about the Petitioner himself. The screenshots never mention the Petitioner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The submitted screenshots were about branding, marketing, and design projects for various companies rather than published material about the Petitioner himself. The screenshots never mention the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24200 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
While one letter detailed the Petitioner's responsibilities and accomplishments contributing to the overall success of one company (demonstrating a critical role there), the Petitioner failed to establish that the organization enjoys a distinguished reputation. The record lacked sufficient evidence of the company's standing in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
While one letter detailed the Petitioner's responsibilities and accomplishments contributing to the overall success of one company (demonstrating a critical role there), the Petitioner failed to establish that the organization enjoys a distinguished reputation. The record lacked sufficient evidence of the company's standing in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_05_B2203; source_row=24203 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
The awards were won by the Petitioner's employer, not the Petitioner herself. The regulation focuses on 'the alien's' receipt of awards. Additionally, the evidence did not show the awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field, and for the 2013 award the company was only a finalist, not a winner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The awards were won by the Petitioner's employer, not the Petitioner herself. The regulation focuses on 'the alien's' receipt of awards. Additionally, the evidence did not show the awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field, and for the 2013 award the company was only a finalist, not a winner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_02_B2203; source_row=24185 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of the alien's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The boat shows were commercial in nature and not 'artistic exhibitions or showcases.' The Petitioner's comparable evidence argument failed because she had not shown that the listed criteria do not readily apply to her occupation — she had in fact claimed to meet more than three criteria, negating the predicate for a comparable evidence claim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The boat shows were commercial in nature and not 'artistic exhibitions or showcases.' The Petitioner's comparable evidence argument failed because she had not shown that the listed criteria do not readily apply to her occupation — she had in fact claimed to meet more than three criteria, negating the predicate for a comparable evidence claim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_02_B2203; source_row=24188 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the Director's finding. The GreekReporter.com article relied on self-promotional readership claims without comparative statistics. The yacht/marine magazine articles only mentioned the Petitioner in passing and were not 'about' her. The videos were not about her and the platform was not shown to be major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the Director's finding. The GreekReporter.com article relied on self-promotional readership claims without comparative statistics. The yacht/marine magazine articles only mentioned the Petitioner in passing and were not 'about' her. The videos were not about her and the platform was not shown to be major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_02_B2203; source_row=24186 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Support letters lacked specific examples of how her experiential marketing approaches widely affected the industry, and the evidence did not show that her contributions had a meaningful impact on the overall field beyond her employer. The regulation requires contributions of major significance 'in the field,' not just to one employer.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Support letters lacked specific examples of how her experiential marketing approaches widely affected the industry, and the evidence did not show that her contributions had a meaningful impact on the overall field beyond her employer. The regulation requires contributions of major significance 'in the field,' not just to one employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-07-02_02_B2203; source_row=24187 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c