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 15921–15930
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner provided only partial and summary translations without required titles, dates, and authors; the articles mentioned his name or contained a picture but were not about him, and were not shown to be in qualifying media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner provided only partial and summary translations without required titles, dates, and authors; the articles mentioned his name or contained a picture but were not about him, and were not shown to be in qualifying media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-04-02_01_B2203; source_row=22540 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Mathematics / Statistics
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner lacked a sufficient record of success or progress in her proposed research. Her four published articles were not accompanied by evidence of significance, implementation, or recognition. Supporting letters praised her generally but did not explain how her work was influential or constituted a record of success.…
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 the Petitioner lacked a sufficient record of success or progress in her proposed research. Her four published articles were not accompanied by evidence of significance, implementation, or recognition. Supporting letters praised her generally but did not explain how her work was influential or constituted a record of success. She also failed to provide a model or plan for future research activities or demonstrate interest from funding entities.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-30_01_B5203; source_row=22533 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Mathematics / Statistics
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer and labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner failed to provide adequate evidence that her proposed research necessitates a waiver, including no information on why labor certification would be impractical, whether the U.S. would benefit even if other workers were available, or whether urgency warranted foregoing the process. AAO noted further detailed discussion was unnecessary given the second prong failure.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner failed to provide adequate evidence that her proposed research necessitates a waiver, including no information on why labor certification would be impractical, whether the U.S. would benefit even if other workers were available, or whether urgency warranted foregoing the process. AAO noted further detailed discussion was unnecessary given the second prong failure.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-30_01_B5203; source_row=22534 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
continuing ability to pay proffered wage from priority date (including multiple beneficiaries)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agrees the record does not currently establish ability to pay, both for the Beneficiary and for beneficiaries of seven other I-140 petitions filed by the Petitioner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agrees the record does not currently establish ability to pay, both for the Beneficiary and for beneficiaries of seven other I-140 petitions filed by the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-30_02_B5203; source_row=22535 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
five years of experience as clinical instructor or health educator
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO identifies discrepancies between the labor certification's experience claim and a 2007 nonimmigrant visa application listing different employment, and finds the president's letter alone insufficient. The Director on remand should request specific corroborating documentation (Korean tax service certificates, NPS pension records, payroll/tax records).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO identifies discrepancies between the labor certification's experience claim and a 2007 nonimmigrant visa application listing different employment, and finds the president's letter alone insufficient. The Director on remand should request specific corroborating documentation (Korean tax service certificates, NPS pension records, payroll/tax records).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-30_02_B5203; source_row=22536 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Mathematics / Statistics
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the Petitioner's proposed teaching lacked national importance because it would not impact the field beyond her school or district. However, AAO found her proposed research component met both the substantial merit and national importance elements, as special education research stands to have broader implications through development of practices and dissemination in professional journals and conferences.
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's proposed teaching lacked national importance because it would not impact the field beyond her school or district. However, AAO found her proposed research component met both the substantial merit and national importance elements, as special education research stands to have broader implications through development of practices and dissemination in professional journals and conferences.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-30_01_B5203; source_row=22532 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
The letters for both PCP and surface steam lacked specific information about broader field-wide impact. The PCP letter failed to identify which companies used the methodology. The surface steam letter showed impact only within the employer's operations, not the greater field, and did not establish Q-testing as an original contribution of the Petitioner since the employer had used the technology for 25 years before his emplo…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The letters for both PCP and surface steam lacked specific information about broader field-wide impact. The PCP letter failed to identify which companies used the methodology. The surface steam letter showed impact only within the employer's operations, not the greater field, and did not establish Q-testing as an original contribution of the Petitioner since the employer had used the technology for 25 years before his employment. The letters were primarily conclusory attestations insufficient to establish major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=22528 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c