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 15751–15760
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AISoftware Engineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
While the Beneficiary was involved in developing multiple products as a software engineer and senior product manager, the evidence does not show that his specific development work is considered of major significance in the field as a whole, as opposed to merely affecting his employers and their product offerings.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
While the Beneficiary was involved in developing multiple products as a software engineer and senior product manager, the evidence does not show that his specific development work is considered of major significance in the field as a whole, as opposed to merely affecting his employers and their product offerings.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_01_B2203; source_row=22720 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AISoftware Engineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Beneficiary's salary was above the median for computer and information systems managers but remained well below the top decile. Additionally, the Petitioner offered no comparative evidence demonstrating that the Beneficiary's other remuneration (stock options, ESPP, benefits) was significantly high relative to others in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Beneficiary's salary was above the median for computer and information systems managers but remained well below the top decile. Additionally, the Petitioner offered no comparative evidence demonstrating that the Beneficiary's other remuneration (stock options, ESPP, benefits) was significantly high relative to others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_01_B2203; source_row=22722 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AISoftware Engineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
None of the submitted articles are about the Beneficiary; they concern his employers and their product launches. The Petitioner failed to establish that the criterion does not readily apply to software engineers or product managers, and thus could not invoke comparable evidence. Even if comparable evidence were permissible, articles about employers and products are not of the same caliber as published material about the alien.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
None of the submitted articles are about the Beneficiary; they concern his employers and their product launches. The Petitioner failed to establish that the criterion does not readily apply to software engineers or product managers, and thus could not invoke comparable evidence. Even if comparable evidence were permissible, articles about employers and products are not of the same caliber as published material about the alien.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_01_B2203; source_row=22719 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO disagreed with the Director that the article is not about the Petitioner, finding it does focus on his career and transition to coaching. However, AAO agreed that the evidence was insufficient to establish the newspaper as major media, as no basis for comparison to similar publications at the national level was provided.
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 that the article is not about the Petitioner, finding it does focus on his career and transition to coaching. However, AAO agreed that the evidence was insufficient to establish the newspaper as major media, as no basis for comparison to similar publications at the national level was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_02_B2203; source_row=22726 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO disagreed with the Director that team awards cannot be attributed to the Petitioner as a team member, but nonetheless found the criterion unmet because the record did not establish that the championship receives national or international recognition for tennis excellence beyond the conference. Awards won by the Petitioner's trainees also cannot be directly linked to the Petitioner's performance as a coach.
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 that team awards cannot be attributed to the Petitioner as a team member, but nonetheless found the criterion unmet because the record did not establish that the championship receives national or international recognition for tennis excellence beyond the conference. Awards won by the Petitioner's trainees also cannot be directly linked to the Petitioner's performance as a coach.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_02_B2203; source_row=22724 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the team had a distinguished reputation but found that the letter from the Director of Athletics lacked sufficient detail to establish a leading or critical role. Mere repetition of regulatory terms without supporting specifics is insufficient.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the team had a distinguished reputation but found that the letter from the Director of Athletics lacked sufficient detail to establish a leading or critical role. Mere repetition of regulatory terms without supporting specifics is insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_02_B2203; source_row=22727 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not directly address the membership requirements on appeal. Neither the number of certifications held nor the reference letters support qualification under this criterion, as no specific membership requirements constituting outstanding achievements were identified.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not directly address the membership requirements on appeal. Neither the number of certifications held nor the reference letters support qualification under this criterion, as no specific membership requirements constituting outstanding achievements were identified.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_02_B2203; source_row=22725 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AISoftware Engineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that as Senior Product Manager, the Beneficiary performed in a critical role for the petitioning company, which has a distinguished reputation. Executive letters described his specific responsibilities and his role in leading one of the company's most important product releases generating significant additional revenue, and articles confirmed the company's 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 as Senior Product Manager, the Beneficiary performed in a critical role for the petitioning company, which has a distinguished reputation. Executive letters described his specific responsibilities and his role in leading one of the company's most important product releases generating significant additional revenue, and articles confirmed the company's distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_01_B2203; source_row=22721 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 formal final merits analysis because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold of three criteria, though it noted the overall record does not support the required level of expertise.
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 formal final merits analysis because the Petitioner did not satisfy the threshold of three criteria, though it noted the overall record does not support the required level of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-31_02_B2203; source_row=22728 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the petitioner demonstrated substantial merit (job creation, tourism contribution, entrepreneurial endeavor) but failed to establish national importance. The business metrics—projected revenue of $2.6 million and 8 employees by year five—did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at regional or national scale, and the petitioner failed to specify where the business would be located or how its projec…
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 found the petitioner demonstrated substantial merit (job creation, tourism contribution, entrepreneurial endeavor) but failed to establish national importance. The business metrics—projected revenue of $2.6 million and 8 employees by year five—did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at regional or national scale, and the petitioner failed to specify where the business would be located or how its projections represented a meaningful increase in tourism.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-30_03_B5203; source_row=22710 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c