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 15181–15190
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the newspaper clipping identified the periodical as 'El Deportivo,' not 'El Universal,' so it was not established that the article appeared in a major publication. The remaining Puerto Rican newspaper articles were about races or events, not about the Petitioner, and therefore did not satisfy the criterion.
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 newspaper clipping identified the periodical as 'El Deportivo,' not 'El Universal,' so it was not established that the article appeared in a major publication. The remaining Puerto Rican newspaper articles were about races or events, not about the Petitioner, and therefore did not satisfy the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_01_B2203; source_row=23363 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the letters did not explain how the Petitioner's individual successes were critical to the team overall, and that individual athletic awards do not establish that his role was essential to the overall performance or standing of the university team. Additionally, the record did not demonstrate that the university team had a distinguished reputation.
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 letters did not explain how the Petitioner's individual successes were critical to the team overall, and that individual athletic awards do not establish that his role was essential to the overall performance or standing of the university team. Additionally, the record did not demonstrate that the university team had a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_01_B2203; source_row=23364 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Biomedical / Life Sciences21 papers732 citations45 reviews
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the evidence as a whole did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field status. Peer review activity lacked comparators; citation rates were noticed by the field but not shown to reach the required level; media coverage credited the principal investigator rather than the Petitioner; and recommendation letters made only conclusory statutory assertions without corroborating detail.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the evidence as a whole did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field status. Peer review activity lacked comparators; citation rates were noticed by the field but not shown to reach the required level; media coverage credited the principal investigator rather than the Petitioner; and recommendation letters made only conclusory statutory assertions without corroborating detail.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_02_B2203; source_row=23369 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 explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three evidentiary criteria, but noted the record does not support 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 explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three evidentiary criteria, but noted the record does not support the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_01_B2203; source_row=23365 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that on appeal, the Petitioner supplied a letter on federation letterhead from the current president confirming active elite membership since 2006, and the federation competition rules showed that qualification for international events is limited and based on sufficient qualifying times and the judgment of national federations, satisfying the criterion's requirements.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that on appeal, the Petitioner supplied a letter on federation letterhead from the current president confirming active elite membership since 2006, and the federation competition rules showed that qualification for international events is limited and based on sufficient qualifying times and the judgment of national federations, satisfying the criterion's requirements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_01_B2203; source_row=23362 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner's placings in continental duathlon competitions at the highest level of competition, including a first place and two second places in elite division events sanctioned by the continental federation, are sufficient to meet this criterion.
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 placings in continental duathlon competitions at the highest level of competition, including a first place and two second places in elite division events sanctioned by the continental federation, are sufficient to meet this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-28_01_B2203; source_row=23361 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
AAO agreed that while the Petitioner's work has substantial merit, it does not rise to national importance because its prospective impact is limited to his employer and its specific clients, lacks broader implications for the field of law, and he has not demonstrated significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic effects nationally.
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 that while the Petitioner's work has substantial merit, it does not rise to national importance because its prospective impact is limited to his employer and its specific clients, lacks broader implications for the field of law, and he has not demonstrated significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic effects nationally.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-27_02_B5203; source_row=23354 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner did not clearly identify her role; she failed to show the teams had distinguished reputations or that her role was leading or of significant importance to the organization's outcomes.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner did not clearly identify her role; she failed to show the teams had distinguished reputations or that her role was leading or of significant importance to the organization's outcomes.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-27_02_B2203; source_row=23352 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
Awards and media coverage reflect honors received but do not equate to original contributions; the coach letters did not identify original contributions or describe impact on the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Awards and media coverage reflect honors received but do not equate to original contributions; the coach letters did not identify original contributions or describe impact on the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-27_02_B2203; source_row=23351 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Major awardNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Major award
major, internationally recognized award
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the awards lacked international recognition comparable to the Nobel, Pulitzer, Academy Award, or Olympic medal, and that a ranking does not constitute a major, internationally recognized award.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the awards lacked international recognition comparable to the Nobel, Pulitzer, Academy Award, or Olympic medal, and that a ranking does not constitute a major, internationally recognized award.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-11-27_02_B2203; source_row=23347 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c