Source-backed decision research

Explore how AAO evaluates evidence.

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.

Clear filters

10,847 decisions / 36,849 findings

Showing 15881–15890

EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Membership

membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements

What the decision said

The Petitioner did not contest the Director's finding on the membership criterion on appeal, so AAO did not address it.

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 contest the Director's finding on the membership criterion on appeal, so AAO did not address it.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-18_02_B2203; source_row=22590
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO disagreed with the Director, finding that at least two papers were published as full papers in conference proceedings, satisfying the 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 +
AAO disagreed with the Director, finding that at least two papers were published as full papers in conference proceedings, satisfying the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-18_02_B2203; source_row=22588
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's service as a paper reviewer for three conferences satisfies the judging criterion.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's service as a paper reviewer for three conferences satisfies the judging criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-18_02_B2203; source_row=22586
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Membership

membership

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO disagreed with the director, finding that membership on the Polish national team and representation at the Summer Olympic Games satisfies the membership criterion requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.

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, finding that membership on the Polish national team and representation at the Summer Olympic Games satisfies the membership criterion requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-18_01_B2203; source_row=22581
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWotherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

other

Ability to pay combined proffered wages

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO affirmed that the Petitioner's withdrawal of the other petition after receiving the NOIR did not cure the deficiency because the relevant timeframe in revocation proceedings is the state of affairs at the petition's approval, when the other petition remained approved. Net income, payments, net current assets, and Sonegawa factors all failed to establish ability to pay combined wages.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed that the Petitioner's withdrawal of the other petition after receiving the NOIR did not cure the deficiency because the relevant timeframe in revocation proceedings is the state of affairs at the petition's approval, when the other petition remained approved. Net income, payments, net current assets, and Sonegawa factors all failed to establish ability to pay combined wages.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-18_02_B5203; source_row=22592
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical Engineering

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO found that while testimonial letters showed some researchers were inspired by the Petitioner's work and citation counts were noted, the record lacked specific evidence demonstrating that the work had already significantly impacted the field as a whole. Letters describing potential future impact and general inspiration do not satisfy the requirement of already-realized contributions of major significance.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
The AAO found that while testimonial letters showed some researchers were inspired by the Petitioner's work and citation counts were noted, the record lacked specific evidence demonstrating that the work had already significantly impacted the field as a whole. Letters describing potential future impact and general inspiration do not satisfy the requirement of already-realized contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-17_01_B2203; source_row=22573
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical Engineering

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

authorship of scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO concurred with the Director that the Petitioner's documented authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications satisfies 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 +
The AAO concurred with the Director that the Petitioner's documented authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications satisfies this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-17_01_B2203; source_row=22574
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Chemistry / Chemical Engineering

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO concurred with the Director that evidence of manuscript review for a professional publication satisfies the judging criterion.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
The AAO concurred with the Director that evidence of manuscript review for a professional publication satisfies the judging criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-17_01_B2203; source_row=22572
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWotherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

other

Ability to pay via bank account records

Why AAO was not persuaded

Bank statements are not among the three required types of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2), and the Petitioner did not explain why this was an 'appropriate case' for their consideration. Moreover, bank statements show a balance on a given date but not a sustainable ability to pay. The 1993 AAU decision cited by the Petitioner was unpublished and thus not binding.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
Bank statements are not among the three required types of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2), and the Petitioner did not explain why this was an 'appropriate case' for their consideration. Moreover, bank statements show a balance on a given date but not a sustainable ability to pay. The 1993 AAU decision cited by the Petitioner was unpublished and thus not binding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-17_01_B5203; source_row=22578
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWotherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

other

Ability to pay via net income or net current assets

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner's net income was $10,093 in 2015 and $7,030 in 2016, and it had net current liabilities (not assets) of $7,676 and $9,701 respectively—all insufficient to cover the $27,048 gap between wages paid and the proffered wage.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's net income was $10,093 in 2015 and $7,030 in 2016, and it had net current liabilities (not assets) of $7,676 and $9,701 respectively—all insufficient to cover the $27,048 gap between wages paid and the proffered wage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-17_01_B5203; source_row=22577
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
← Back to assessment