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 15811–15820
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien
Why AAO was not persuaded
The documentary was not about the Petitioner but rather featured him in a supporting role. The newspaper articles lacked certified English translations. Even if translations were provided, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the newspapers qualify as major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The documentary was not about the Petitioner but rather featured him in a supporting role. The newspaper articles lacked certified English translations. Even if translations were provided, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the newspapers qualify as major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_01_B2203; source_row=22655 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
Expert letters from retired military officers largely addressed prospective contributions the Petitioner will or may make rather than contributions he has already made. The Petitioner did not show the impact his publications have had in the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Expert letters from retired military officers largely addressed prospective contributions the Petitioner will or may make rather than contributions he has already made. The Petitioner did not show the impact his publications have had in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_01_B2203; source_row=22657 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO declines to revisit the role with the named organization because it was not raised in the most recent prior motion and is not properly before AAO; regardless of title (volunteer vs. consultant), the Petitioner cited no authority showing the prior conclusion was incorrect.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declines to revisit the role with the named organization because it was not raised in the most recent prior motion and is not properly before AAO; regardless of title (volunteer vs. consultant), the Petitioner cited no authority showing the prior conclusion was incorrect.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_02_B2203; source_row=22661 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated 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 the evidence was persuasive
On appeal, the Petitioner provided two articles satisfying the criterion: one from September 2015 discussing his career and background, and one from May 2017 describing a talk he gave, both published on websites of major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
On appeal, the Petitioner provided two articles satisfying the criterion: one from September 2015 discussing his career and background, and one from May 2017 describing a talk he gave, both published on websites of major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_03_B2203; source_row=22662 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
On appeal, the Petitioner corrected the identified deficiencies, and the evidence established that four of his books meet the requirements of this criterion.
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 +
On appeal, the Petitioner corrected the identified deficiencies, and the evidence established that four of his books meet the requirements of this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_03_B2203; source_row=22664 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner originally indicated he met the judging criterion but did not raise this issue on appeal, and the record does not establish he meets it.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner originally indicated he met the judging criterion but did not raise this issue on appeal, and the record does not establish he meets it.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_01_B2203; source_row=22656 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO disagreed with the Director's categorical exclusion of governmental organizations and found sufficient corroborating evidence—including a service certification from the Admiral of the Turkish Naval Forces—to establish that the Petitioner held a leading role in a distinguished organization.
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 categorical exclusion of governmental organizations and found sufficient corroborating evidence—including a service certification from the Admiral of the Turkish Naval Forces—to establish that the Petitioner held a leading role in a distinguished organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-15_01_B2203; source_row=22659 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that while the Petitioner had published research, she did not demonstrate a sufficient record of success or progress, nor meaningful interest from relevant parties. Her research had not been frequently cited, had not affected clinical practice, and had not generated substantial discourse in the broader medical community. One key article was not published until after the filing date.…
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the Petitioner had published research, she did not demonstrate a sufficient record of success or progress, nor meaningful interest from relevant parties. Her research had not been frequently cited, had not affected clinical practice, and had not generated substantial discourse in the broader medical community. One key article was not published until after the filing date. A proposed clinic collaboration was shelved due to business/financial issues.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-11_01_B5203; source_row=22653 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner's proposed research on psychological therapies for liver patients has substantial merit and national importance given its potential prospective impact on a broad patient population and dissemination through psychology journals.…
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 that the Petitioner's proposed research on psychological therapies for liver patients has substantial merit and national importance given its potential prospective impact on a broad patient population and dissemination through psychology journals. However, AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's clinical duties and nurse training program development work did not independently satisfy the national importance element.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-05-11_01_B5203; source_row=22652 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c