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 15671–15680
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States
What the decision said
AAO declined to reach the third prong because failure on prongs 1 and 2 was dispositive.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach the third prong because failure on prongs 1 and 2 was dispositive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-26_01_B5203; source_row=22826 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
AAO found that the reference letters praised the Petitioner's popularity and social media reach but did not establish how her popularity equates to original athletic contributions of major significance in the field of fitness instruction.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the reference letters praised the Petitioner's popularity and social media reach but did not establish how her popularity equates to original athletic contributions of major significance in the field of fitness instruction.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=22814 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner had not established the duration of her spokesperson roles, whether her work extended beyond the Korean market, or to what extent her work influenced company success, and also found no evidence that the relevant organizations have distinguished reputations.
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 had not established the duration of her spokesperson roles, whether her work extended beyond the Korean market, or to what extent her work influenced company success, and also found no evidence that the relevant organizations have distinguished reputations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=22816 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that multiple articles published in major media, including two articles and an interview piece, were about the Petitioner and her work in the field, with traffic data confirming major media status.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that multiple articles published in major media, including two articles and an interview piece, were about the Petitioner and her work in the field, with traffic data confirming major media status.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=22813 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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
AAO disagreed with the Director's rationale (timing) but still found the criterion unmet because two of the agreements were not signed by both parties and the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner actually received the payments.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO disagreed with the Director's rationale (timing) but still found the criterion unmet because two of the agreements were not signed by both parties and the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner actually received the payments.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-25_01_B2203; source_row=22817 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the petitioner's presentations and work-related products were not scholarly in nature, were not published in professional or major trade publications, and the proposed research paper abstract was not shown to have been completed or published.
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 +
AAO found the petitioner's presentations and work-related products were not scholarly in nature, were not published in professional or major trade publications, and the proposed research paper abstract was not shown to have been completed or published.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-22_01_B2203; source_row=22806 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherEngineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the internal company written work did not qualify as published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media, and the petitioner had not shown press or media coverage.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the internal company written work did not qualify as published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media, and the petitioner had not shown press or media coverage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-22_01_B2203; source_row=22805 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the employer's Excellence Award was limited to employees at the company and the petitioner did not demonstrate it was nationally or internationally recognized or that he faced significant competition from throughout the field.
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 employer's Excellence Award was limited to employees at the company and the petitioner did not demonstrate it was nationally or internationally recognized or that he faced significant competition from throughout the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-22_01_B2203; source_row=22803 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherEngineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO evaluated the totality of the evidence and found the petitioner's judging service was limited in significance, his critical role did not generate widespread field acclaim, his high salary was not shown to place him among the top of the field, and his publications and presentations lacked evidence of significant recognition, citations, or major contributions to the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO evaluated the totality of the evidence and found the petitioner's judging service was limited in significance, his critical role did not generate widespread field acclaim, his high salary was not shown to place him among the top of the field, and his publications and presentations lacked evidence of significant recognition, citations, or major contributions to the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-22_01_B2203; source_row=22807 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the petitioner did not establish that his memberships require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts, and the record lacked bylaws or other evidence of membership requirements.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the petitioner did not establish that his memberships require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts, and the record lacked bylaws or other evidence of membership requirements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-06-22_01_B2203; source_row=22804 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c