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 15151–15160
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot established
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Membership
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
Most of the participation evidence post-dates the filing date and is excluded; the remaining 2009 invitation does not show that participation requires outstanding achievements 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 +
Most of the participation evidence post-dates the filing date and is excluded; the remaining 2009 invitation does not show that participation requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The comparable-evidence argument fails because the Petitioner has not shown the listed criteria do not readily apply to lawyers, and in any event the proffered evidence is not of the same caliber as that required by (h)(3)(ii).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-12-11_01_B2203; source_row=23396 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
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record does not establish the required acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in dicta that the record does not establish the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-12-11_02_B2203; source_row=23405 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary meets DOL-certified educational requirement (master's degree or foreign equivalent in chemistry)
Why AAO was not persuaded
Three independent evaluations confirmed that the Beneficiary's Indian master's degree alone is only equivalent to a U.S. baccalaureate; equivalency to a U.S. master's required combining the degree with work experience, which is impermissible given the labor certification explicitly excludes alternate combinations of education and experience.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Three independent evaluations confirmed that the Beneficiary's Indian master's degree alone is only equivalent to a U.S. baccalaureate; equivalency to a U.S. master's required combining the degree with work experience, which is impermissible given the labor certification explicitly excludes alternate combinations of education and experience.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-12-11_01_B5203; source_row=23400 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the scholarship program's focus was to give additional professional opportunities to trainees in the field to attend an international conference, not to recognize excellence in the field, and that insufficient corroborating evidence established it as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence.
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 scholarship program's focus was to give additional professional opportunities to trainees in the field to attend an international conference, not to recognize excellence in the field, and that insufficient corroborating evidence established it as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-12-10_01_B2203; source_row=23391 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c