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.
Advanced degree qualification – experience requirement per labor certification
Why the evidence was persuasive
After reviewing the Petitioner's response to the NOID and conducting further investigation, the AAO found the experience evidence reliable and that the Beneficiary had the required qualifying employment as a systems analyst.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
After reviewing the Petitioner's response to the NOID and conducting further investigation, the AAO found the experience evidence reliable and that the Beneficiary had the required qualifying employment as a systems analyst.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-12_02_B5203; source_row=22209 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
After issuing its own NOID and reviewing additional documentation submitted by the Petitioner together with further independent investigation, the AAO found the educational evidence reliable and establishing that the Beneficiary earned a master's degree in management information systems as claimed.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
After issuing its own NOID and reviewing additional documentation submitted by the Petitioner together with further independent investigation, the AAO found the educational evidence reliable and establishing that the Beneficiary earned a master's degree in management information systems as claimed.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-12_02_B5203; source_row=22208 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the Petitioner's salary of $231,255 was essentially equivalent to the prevailing wage for fully competent physicians in his area, that national average comparisons were insufficiently specific, and that he did not demonstrate his income was high or significantly above comparable neonatologists.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the Petitioner's salary of $231,255 was essentially equivalent to the prevailing wage for fully competent physicians in his area, that national average comparisons were insufficiently specific, and that he did not demonstrate his income was high or significantly above comparable neonatologists.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-11_01_B2203; source_row=22202 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 AAO found that while letters demonstrated the Petitioner's talent and potential, none identified already-realized contributions of major significance in the field. Letters spoke to future potential rather than demonstrated impact, publications alone are insufficient under this criterion, and there was no evidence that the field had widely adopted or been significantly changed by his research.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that while letters demonstrated the Petitioner's talent and potential, none identified already-realized contributions of major significance in the field. Letters spoke to future potential rather than demonstrated impact, publications alone are insufficient under this criterion, and there was no evidence that the field had widely adopted or been significantly changed by his research.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-11_01_B2203; source_row=22199 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
The AAO concurred that the Petitioner's roles as Section Chief, liaison, and committee member confirmed he played a critical role in shaping perinatal care at an organization with 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 AAO concurred that the Petitioner's roles as Section Chief, liaison, and committee member confirmed he played a critical role in shaping perinatal care at an organization with a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-11_01_B2203; source_row=22201 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
procedural or other
timely response to NOID / abandonment
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the NOID instructions were ambiguous and the Petitioner had in fact responded within the allotted period by sending its submission to a valid Texas Service Center address, so abandonment was not established.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the NOID instructions were ambiguous and the Petitioner had in fact responded within the allotted period by sending its submission to a valid Texas Service Center address, so abandonment was not established.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2018-01-04_01_B5203; source_row=22198 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c