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 15801–15810
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 withdrew the Director's favorable finding, concluding that the published materials were not 'about' the Petitioner but rather about the photo shoot itself, and did not qualify as professional or major trade publications or major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the Director's favorable finding, concluding that the published materials were not 'about' the Petitioner but rather about the photo shoot itself, and did not qualify as professional or major trade publications or major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_01_B2203; source_row=22667 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner did not demonstrate the organization requires outstanding achievements of its members as judged by recognized experts; the letter from the founder was not corroborated, and the record lacked evidence establishing the purported expert's association with the organization or her national or international recognition.
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 demonstrate the organization requires outstanding achievements of its members as judged by recognized experts; the letter from the founder was not corroborated, and the record lacked evidence establishing the purported expert's association with the organization or her national or international recognition.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_01_B2203; source_row=22666 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner failed to establish that the organizations in which he claimed roles had a distinguished reputation, that the art district constitutes an organization or establishment, or that his roles were genuinely leading or critical. Conflicting evidence about who founded the art district remained unresolved.
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 failed to establish that the organizations in which he claimed roles had a distinguished reputation, that the art district constitutes an organization or establishment, or that his roles were genuinely leading or critical. Conflicting evidence about who founded the art district remained unresolved.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_02_B2203; source_row=22674 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner's books, which transcribed conversations and showcased artwork, were not scholarly articles intended for learned persons in the field. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide evidence that the publisher was a professional or major trade publication.
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 that the Petitioner's books, which transcribed conversations and showcased artwork, were not scholarly articles intended for learned persons in the field. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to provide evidence that the publisher was a professional or major trade publication.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_02_B2203; source_row=22672 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 did not meet the threshold of three criteria; AAO noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required expertise level.
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 did not meet the threshold of three criteria; AAO noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required expertise level.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_01_B2203; source_row=22669 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
Both AAO and the Director agreed that the Petitioner met the published material criterion. AAO affirmed this finding without separate detailed analysis.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Both AAO and the Director agreed that the Petitioner met the published material criterion. AAO affirmed this finding without separate detailed analysis.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_02_B2203; source_row=22670 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 exhibition evidence did not establish the significance of the art exhibit or its sponsor, and that the expert letters describing the Petitioner's artistic movement were prospective in nature and did not show actual impact at the time of filing.…
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 exhibition evidence did not establish the significance of the art exhibit or its sponsor, and that the expert letters describing the Petitioner's artistic movement were prospective in nature and did not show actual impact at the time of filing. Conflicting evidence about who founded the art district remained unresolved, and authenticity concerns about a supporting letter from an organization that could not be verified further undermined the evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_02_B2203; source_row=22671 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 full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidentiary threshold, but noted that the aggregate record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
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 full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidentiary threshold, but noted that the aggregate record would not support a finding of extraordinary ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-17_02_B2203; source_row=22675 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 in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters described academic discourse but did not identify specific ways the Petitioner's contributions had been of major significance. The prospective value of his work does not satisfy the criterion's requirement of already having made a significant impact, and his popularity among younger readers was not shown to have affected the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The letters described academic discourse but did not identify specific ways the Petitioner's contributions had been of major significance. The prospective value of his work does not satisfy the criterion's requirement of already having made a significant impact, and his popularity among younger readers was not shown to have affected the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_03_B2203; source_row=22663 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c