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 16051–16060
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the projected metrics — including 1%-2% profit margins, payroll taxes, and a planned headcount of 17 employees — did not demonstrate substantial economic effects extending beyond the company to the regional or national economy. Benefits to overseas markets are not germane, and the Petitioner failed to corroborate his claims about supplier and shipping-industry impacts.
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 projected metrics — including 1%-2% profit margins, payroll taxes, and a planned headcount of 17 employees — did not demonstrate substantial economic effects extending beyond the company to the regional or national economy. Benefits to overseas markets are not germane, and the Petitioner failed to corroborate his claims about supplier and shipping-industry impacts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_01_B5203; source_row=22390 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to fully conduct the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed step one, but noted the record would not support the required finding even if step one were met.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to fully conduct the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed step one, but noted the record would not support the required finding even if step one were met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_02_B2203; source_row=22397 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Electrical / Electronic Engineering64 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three criteria at step one, though AAO noted the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three criteria at step one, though AAO noted the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-27_01_B2203; source_row=22389 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
60 months of qualifying post-baccalaureate experience
Why the evidence was persuasive
Under Matter of O-A-, Inc., the provisional certificate qualifies as the degree-conferral date here, and the additional evidence on appeal establishes the disputed prior-employer experience by a preponderance.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Under Matter of O-A-, Inc., the provisional certificate qualifies as the degree-conferral date here, and the additional evidence on appeal establishes the disputed prior-employer experience by a preponderance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-22_01_B5203; source_row=22381 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c