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 16101–16110
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO addressed this in final merits, finding that the comparator occupations were not sufficiently similar to the Beneficiary's role and that the salary data showed earnings just above the median but well below the top decile for his field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO addressed this in final merits, finding that the comparator occupations were not sufficiently similar to the Beneficiary's role and that the salary data showed earnings just above the median but well below the top decile for his field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B2203; source_row=22332 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the Beneficiary's six peer reviews, 11 total citations, three journal articles, one conference paper, and critical role at his employer, taken together, do not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Beneficiary's six peer reviews, 11 total citations, three journal articles, one conference paper, and critical role at his employer, taken together, do not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field. Citation data contradicted petitioner's claims about top-percentile ranking, salary comparisons used dissimilar occupations, and company press coverage did not mention the Beneficiary personally.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B2203; source_row=22333 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO did not separately resolve this at step 1, addressing it instead in final merits, finding insufficient evidence that the Beneficiary's work has been widely implemented or achieved major significance in the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO did not separately resolve this at step 1, addressing it instead in final merits, finding insufficient evidence that the Beneficiary's work has been widely implemented or achieved major significance in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B2203; source_row=22329 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO did not separately rule on this criterion at step 1 but addressed the awards evidence in the final merits determination, finding that the graduate scholarship and venture capital funding do not constitute nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO did not separately rule on this criterion at step 1 but addressed the awards evidence in the final merits determination, finding that the graduate scholarship and venture capital funding do not constitute nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B2203; source_row=22327 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO disagreed with the Director and found the Beneficiary has performed in a critical role for the Petitioner, an organization that has a distinguished reputation.
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 and found the Beneficiary has performed in a critical role for the Petitioner, an organization that has a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B2203; source_row=22331 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary's standing as affected party in revocation proceedings
What the decision said
The AAO declined to determine the Beneficiary's portability eligibility on the current record, finding that the Director must first make that determination on remand before any merits decision can be issued.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO declined to determine the Beneficiary's portability eligibility on the current record, finding that the Director must first make that determination on remand before any merits decision can be issued.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_02_B5203; source_row=22337 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Notice of Filing posting requirements for roving employees
Why AAO was not persuaded
DOL guidance requires posting at client worksites for roving employees in addition to internal print/electronic notice; Petitioner did not show such posting at client sites.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
DOL guidance requires posting at client worksites for roving employees in addition to internal print/electronic notice; Petitioner did not show such posting at client sites.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B5203; source_row=22336 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Beneficiary holds a U.S. master's degree, which is above a baccalaureate, and the field requires a degree, making him an advanced degree professional.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Beneficiary holds a U.S. master's degree, which is above a baccalaureate, and the field requires a degree, making him an advanced degree professional.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-02-02_01_B5203; source_row=22334 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c