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 15101–15110
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while the Petitioner's research topics are original, the record did not show that any of his contributions—regarding nutrition, Hepatitis A, rotavirus, or HIV—had significantly impacted the field at large. Citation rates alone were insufficient without evidence of wide implementation or remarkable impact. Letters from colleagues described use of his work but did not establish field-wide major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the Petitioner's research topics are original, the record did not show that any of his contributions—regarding nutrition, Hepatitis A, rotavirus, or HIV—had significantly impacted the field at large. Citation rates alone were insufficient without evidence of wide implementation or remarkable impact. Letters from colleagues described use of his work but did not establish field-wide major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-08_01_B2203; source_row=23462 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach final merits because the step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in passing that the record would not support the required acclaim finding.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach final merits because the step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in passing that the record would not support the required acclaim finding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-08_01_B2203; source_row=23464 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner failed to show his work would have broader implications for structural engineering or significant potential to employ U.S. workers beyond staffing his own company. Past projects in Canada and Indonesia do not demonstrate future U.S.…
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 agreed the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner failed to show his work would have broader implications for structural engineering or significant potential to employ U.S. workers beyond staffing his own company. Past projects in Canada and Indonesia do not demonstrate future U.S. impact, and the general industry documentation shows the importance of engineering as a profession but not the national importance of the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B5203; source_row=23458 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
The reference letters discuss the Petitioner's work in general terms but do not explain how it has impacted the field in a major or significant way, such as by showing his techniques have been widely used by others. The documents primarily contain attestations of status without specific examples of major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The reference letters discuss the Petitioner's work in general terms but do not explain how it has impacted the field in a major or significant way, such as by showing his techniques have been widely used by others. The documents primarily contain attestations of status without specific examples of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B2203; source_row=23454 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO noted the step-2 analysis was unnecessary given failure at step 1, but performed an alternative review and found the record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO noted the step-2 analysis was unnecessary given failure at step 1, but performed an alternative review and found the record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B2203; source_row=23457 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The record lacks the association's constitution, bylaws, or other official documents detailing its membership selection process. Conclusory letters mirroring regulatory language are insufficient, and there is inconsistent information about who recommended the Petitioner for membership. The two recommendation letters are nearly identical in wording, undermining their credibility as independent expert assessments.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record lacks the association's constitution, bylaws, or other official documents detailing its membership selection process. Conclusory letters mirroring regulatory language are insufficient, and there is inconsistent information about who recommended the Petitioner for membership. The two recommendation letters are nearly identical in wording, undermining their credibility as independent expert assessments.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B2203; source_row=23452 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner's written works—a six-page book and one-page articles without footnotes, endnotes, or bibliographies—do not qualify as scholarly articles. Furthermore, the publications (with circulations of 580 and 4,000 copies) have not been shown to be major media or professional/major trade 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 +
The Petitioner's written works—a six-page book and one-page articles without footnotes, endnotes, or bibliographies—do not qualify as scholarly articles. Furthermore, the publications (with circulations of 580 and 4,000 copies) have not been shown to be major media or professional/major trade publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B2203; source_row=23455 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The record includes a certificate confirming the Petitioner was a member of the jury and judged craftsmen's work at the 2015 exhibition, and additional documentation of judging at the 2014 showcase.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The record includes a certificate confirming the Petitioner was a member of the jury and judged craftsmen's work at the 2015 exhibition, and additional documentation of judging at the 2014 showcase.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2019-01-03_01_B2203; source_row=23453 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c