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.
The HOSFSP is an internal employer program, not an association within the meaning of the regulation. Participation is limited to company employees, making it more appropriate for consideration under the leading/critical role criterion. Moreover, the letter did not establish that outstanding achievements are an essential requirement for participation or that recognized national/international experts judge selection.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The HOSFSP is an internal employer program, not an association within the meaning of the regulation. Participation is limited to company employees, making it more appropriate for consideration under the leading/critical role criterion. Moreover, the letter did not establish that outstanding achievements are an essential requirement for participation or that recognized national/international experts judge selection.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=22526 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner's participation in projects and informal feedback activities does not equate to participation as a judge in the field. The criterion requires a formal designation in a judging capacity, which the Petitioner's evidence did not establish.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's participation in projects and informal feedback activities does not equate to participation as a judge in the field. The criterion requires a formal designation in a judging capacity, which the Petitioner's evidence did not establish.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=22527 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 agreed with the Director that the Petitioner documented his service in HOSFSP and demonstrated contributions to the successes of the company, establishing a critical role.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner documented his service in HOSFSP and demonstrated contributions to the successes of the company, establishing a critical role.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=22529 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or remuneration
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO concurred with the Director that the Petitioner's salary, approximately twice the high-end wages in his field, satisfies the high salary criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concurred with the Director that the Petitioner's salary, approximately twice the high-end wages in his field, satisfies the high salary criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=22530 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
Multiple deficiencies were identified: missing authors and/or dates on many items, failure to establish that the publications qualify as major media, inconsistent readership statistics, a self-authored post-filing article, and a TV interview lacking a transcript. The Petitioner did not meet all required elements of the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Multiple deficiencies were identified: missing authors and/or dates on many items, failure to establish that the publications qualify as major media, inconsistent readership statistics, a self-authored post-filing article, and a TV interview lacking a transcript. The Petitioner did not meet all required elements of the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-27_01_B2203; source_row=22520 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Journalistic articles written for the general public are not scholarly articles written for learned persons with profound knowledge of the field. The book was described as a journalistic effort, not a scholarly work, and was not shown to be published in 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 +
Journalistic articles written for the general public are not scholarly articles written for learned persons with profound knowledge of the field. The book was described as a journalistic effort, not a scholarly work, and was not shown to be published in a professional or major trade publication. The Petitioner failed to show the criterion does not readily apply to journalists or that her submissions are truly comparable to scholarly articles.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-27_01_B2203; source_row=22522 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters did not establish a leadership position or that the Petitioner's work was of significant importance to the newspapers' outcomes. The Petitioner did not show her reporting resulted in higher sales or that newspapers gained awards or reputation because of her. Additionally, the record did not demonstrate that the publications had a distinguished reputation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The letters did not establish a leadership position or that the Petitioner's work was of significant importance to the newspapers' outcomes. The Petitioner did not show her reporting resulted in higher sales or that newspapers gained awards or reputation because of her. Additionally, the record did not demonstrate that the publications had a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-27_01_B2203; source_row=22524 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 described specific stories but did not explain how the work impacted the field of journalism as a whole. Claims about helping police investigations were speculative. Letters attesting to skills and talent without explaining how contributions influenced the field are insufficient. USCIS need not accept primarily conclusory statements.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The letters described specific stories but did not explain how the work impacted the field of journalism as a whole. Claims about helping police investigations were speculative. Letters attesting to skills and talent without explaining how contributions influenced the field are insufficient. USCIS need not accept primarily conclusory statements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-27_01_B2203; source_row=22521 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO consulted EDGE, which states postgraduate diplomas combined with three-year degrees can equate to a U.S. bachelor's only if issued by an accredited university or AICTE-approved institution; the diploma's issuer is neither. The H-1B equivalency regulations permitting combinations do not apply to EB-2 advanced-degree professionals.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO consulted EDGE, which states postgraduate diplomas combined with three-year degrees can equate to a U.S. bachelor's only if issued by an accredited university or AICTE-approved institution; the diploma's issuer is neither. The H-1B equivalency regulations permitting combinations do not apply to EB-2 advanced-degree professionals.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-03-26_02_B5203; source_row=22506 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c