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 14571–14580
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
What the decision said
The Director had denied the petition on this prong, but AAO did not reach a merits conclusion, instead remanding for fresh consideration under Dhanasar.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
The Director had denied the petition on this prong, but AAO did not reach a merits conclusion, instead remanding for fresh consideration under Dhanasar.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-30_01_B5203; source_row=24055 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner's research funding secured as principal investigator, published material in Nature and Science, high citation record, editorial board memberships, international conference presentations, and leadership contributions collectively establish extraordinary ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Petitioner's research funding secured as principal investigator, published material in Nature and Science, high citation record, editorial board memberships, international conference presentations, and leadership contributions collectively establish extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-30_02_B2203; source_row=24062 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found that the Petitioner had not documented the extent of impact from his past work in Korea, had not shown his work served as an impetus for progress in the field or generated substantial positive discourse in the broader academic community, and that a letter from a university partner did not reflect sufficient stakeholder interest to establish he was well positioned.
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 found that the Petitioner had not documented the extent of impact from his past work in Korea, had not shown his work served as an impetus for progress in the field or generated substantial positive discourse in the broader academic community, and that a letter from a university partner did not reflect sufficient stakeholder interest to establish he was well positioned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-29_01_B5203; source_row=24046 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient evidence of national importance. The Petitioner did not show the number of individuals his organization would impact, broader implications for public administration or policy, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, substantial positive economic effects, or that his teaching duties would impact the field more broadly than his own students.
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 proposed endeavor lacked sufficient evidence of national importance. The Petitioner did not show the number of individuals his organization would impact, broader implications for public administration or policy, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, substantial positive economic effects, or that his teaching duties would impact the field more broadly than his own students.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-29_01_B5203; source_row=24045 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
What the decision said
The AAO declined to reach the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the first and second prongs, making further analysis of the balancing factors unnecessary.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
The AAO declined to reach the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the first and second prongs, making further analysis of the balancing factors unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-29_01_B5203; source_row=24047 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the criterion not met because the supporting letters did not provide detailed information reflecting how the Petitioner contributed to the outcome of the organization's activities, the organizations were not shown to have distinguished reputations, and the evidence did not establish that the Petitioner performed in a truly leading or critical role for any qualifying organization.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the criterion not met because the supporting letters did not provide detailed information reflecting how the Petitioner contributed to the outcome of the organization's activities, the organizations were not shown to have distinguished reputations, and the evidence did not establish that the Petitioner performed in a truly leading or critical role for any qualifying organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-05-28_01_B2203; source_row=24043 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c