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 16301–16310
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot established
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical70 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the Petitioner did not establish that the two websites constitute major media, as the only evidence of their reach was self-promotional material from the publishers without corroborating viewership statistics.
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 did not establish that the two websites constitute major media, as the only evidence of their reach was self-promotional material from the publishers without corroborating viewership statistics.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-11_01_B2203; source_row=22120 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical70 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the letters merely repeated the word 'critical' without showing how the Petitioner contributed to the success or reputation of the clinic. The articles submitted did not demonstrate the clinic has a distinguished reputation, and the Petitioner did not submit promised statistics or employer letters. Regarding the hospital, the Petitioner failed to submit the evidence he indicated he would provide.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found the letters merely repeated the word 'critical' without showing how the Petitioner contributed to the success or reputation of the clinic. The articles submitted did not demonstrate the clinic has a distinguished reputation, and the Petitioner did not submit promised statistics or employer letters. Regarding the hospital, the Petitioner failed to submit the evidence he indicated he would provide.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-11_01_B2203; source_row=22124 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical70 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the citing articles credited the Petitioner along with other cited papers but did not single out his work as particularly important or of major significance. Recommendation letters contained primarily conclusory attestations without specific examples of how the Petitioner's work influenced the field at a level consistent with major significance.
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 the citing articles credited the Petitioner along with other cited papers but did not single out his work as particularly important or of major significance. Recommendation letters contained primarily conclusory attestations without specific examples of how the Petitioner's work influenced the field at a level consistent with major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-11_01_B2203; source_row=22122 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
While AAO found substantial merit in the Petitioner's route planning and vehicle scheduling work, her proposed work for her employer lacks implications beyond the company and its customers at a level sufficient to establish national importance, and the record does not show original innovations that advance the industry or broader implications in supply chain management.
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 +
While AAO found substantial merit in the Petitioner's route planning and vehicle scheduling work, her proposed work for her employer lacks implications beyond the company and its customers at a level sufficient to establish national importance, and the record does not show original innovations that advance the industry or broader implications in supply chain management.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-08_01_B5203; source_row=22116 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor of analyzing her employer's logistical operations, based on her academic background, research experience, and reference letters attesting to her statistical and transportation analysis skills.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor of analyzing her employer's logistical operations, based on her academic background, research experience, and reference letters attesting to her statistical and transportation analysis skills.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-08_01_B5203; source_row=22117 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO declined to address the third prong because the Petitioner had not established the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong, making further discussion of the balancing factors unnecessary.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to address the third prong because the Petitioner had not established the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong, making further discussion of the balancing factors unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-08_01_B5203; source_row=22118 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
qualifying physician NIW employment arrangement under 8 C.F.R. § 204.12(c)(1)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO finds the new evidence does not establish eligibility as an employee under 8 C.F.R. § 204.12(c)(1)(i), and the Petitioner does not contest the prior findings on this issue.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds the new evidence does not establish eligibility as an employee under 8 C.F.R. § 204.12(c)(1)(i), and the Petitioner does not contest the prior findings on this issue.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-05_01_B5203; source_row=22114 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO accepts new evidence that the signatory was in fact a designated/authorized signor and that the Petitioner had a good-faith belief in the arrangement, and accordingly withdraws the willful-misrepresentation finding.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO accepts new evidence that the signatory was in fact a designated/authorized signor and that the Petitioner had a good-faith belief in the arrangement, and accordingly withdraws the willful-misrepresentation finding.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-12-05_01_B5203; source_row=22115 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c