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.
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputations
Why AAO was not persuaded
The evidence did not show that the Petitioner held a leadership position or performed an essential critical role for either organization. The record also failed to establish that the ultrarunning organization enjoyed 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 evidence did not show that the Petitioner held a leadership position or performed an essential critical role for either organization. The record also failed to establish that the ultrarunning organization enjoyed a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_06_B2203; source_row=22420 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The websites merely listed the Petitioner among all other participants without discussion of him, and the article in which he was quoted was about a race event, not about the Petitioner. Neither outlet was demonstrated to be a professional or major trade publication or other major medium.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The websites merely listed the Petitioner among all other participants without discussion of him, and the article in which he was quoted was about a race event, not about the Petitioner. Neither outlet was demonstrated to be a professional or major trade publication or other major medium.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_06_B2203; source_row=22417 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 Petitioner failed to show how his fundraising impacted the field of ultramarathon running, and his personal race achievements did not constitute contributions of major significance to the field at large. Reference letters praised his athletic ability and character but did not explain how he made original 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 Petitioner failed to show how his fundraising impacted the field of ultramarathon running, and his personal race achievements did not constitute contributions of major significance to the field at large. Reference letters praised his athletic ability and character but did not explain how he made original contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_06_B2203; source_row=22418 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 did not show the Petitioner's blade-shaping method had an overarching impact in the field, and there was no evidence others in the field were utilizing his technique. While acknowledging the positive effect on the team in 2016, the AAO found this fell short 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 letters did not show the Petitioner's blade-shaping method had an overarching impact in the field, and there was no evidence others in the field were utilizing his technique. While acknowledging the positive effect on the team in 2016, the AAO found this fell short of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_04_B2203; source_row=22404 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The record lacked corroborating evidence regarding the nature and length of the Petitioner's tenure, the relationship between the relevant organizations was unexplained, and the evidence did not demonstrate that his role constituted a leading or critical role for the organization as a whole.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record lacked corroborating evidence regarding the nature and length of the Petitioner's tenure, the relationship between the relevant organizations was unexplained, and the evidence did not demonstrate that his role constituted a leading or critical role for the organization as a whole.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_04_B2203; source_row=22405 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
On appeal, the Petitioner submitted no new evidence to establish that the competitions received national or international recognition, and the record lacked corroborating evidence such as official results to substantiate receipt of the awards.
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 submitted no new evidence to establish that the competitions received national or international recognition, and the record lacked corroborating evidence such as official results to substantiate receipt of the awards.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_04_B2203; source_row=22403 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner relied on Wikipedia for circulation data, which lacks reliability as an open user-edited website, and the letters describing the magazine as a major trade publication were uncorroborated. The record lacks sufficient documentation confirming the magazine qualifies as a professional or major trade publication.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner relied on Wikipedia for circulation data, which lacks reliability as an open user-edited website, and the letters describing the magazine as a major trade publication were uncorroborated. The record lacks sufficient documentation confirming the magazine qualifies as a professional or major trade publication.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_01_B2203; source_row=22384 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Electrical / Electronic Engineering64 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters do not corroborate claims about the economic impact of the Petitioner's work, do not clarify how his role differentiated him from similarly-employed individuals, and fail to specify how he contributed to the organizations' outcomes. Neither employer was shown to possess a distinguished reputation through independent, objective evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The letters do not corroborate claims about the economic impact of the Petitioner's work, do not clarify how his role differentiated him from similarly-employed individuals, and fail to specify how he contributed to the organizations' outcomes. Neither employer was shown to possess a distinguished reputation through independent, objective evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_01_B2203; source_row=22388 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Electrical / Electronic Engineering64 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original scientific contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters from colleagues, while supportive, do not specifically identify how contributions influenced the field at large or detail actual impact beyond the Petitioner's immediate circle. The 64-citation record was not shown to indicate significant influence, and future prospective benefits do not satisfy the requirement that major impacts have already occurred.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The letters from colleagues, while supportive, do not specifically identify how contributions influenced the field at large or detail actual impact beyond the Petitioner's immediate circle. The 64-citation record was not shown to indicate significant influence, and future prospective benefits do not satisfy the requirement that major impacts have already occurred.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_01_B2203; source_row=22386 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c