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 16381–16390
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
remuneration
What the decision said
AAO noted the Petitioner's claim on appeal but elected to consider the related evidence in the final merits determination rather than ruling on the criterion separately.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO noted the Petitioner's claim on appeal but elected to consider the related evidence in the final merits determination rather than ruling on the criterion separately.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-16_01_B2203; source_row=22038 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the totality of evidence shows sustained national acclaim: nationally recognized awards, editorship at Nepal's top newspaper, demonstrated policy and constitutional impact of reporting, founding a women's issues department, judging prominent awards, and endorsement by senior government officials and media leaders.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the totality of evidence shows sustained national acclaim: nationally recognized awards, editorship at Nepal's top newspaper, demonstrated policy and constitutional impact of reporting, founding a women's issues department, judging prominent awards, and endorsement by senior government officials and media leaders.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-16_01_B2203; source_row=22039 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner had provided several feature articles and full-length interviews about her work published in major national newspapers in Nepal, including the number-one ranked national newspaper with daily circulation of 350,000, as well as television appearances, satisfying criterion iii.
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 Petitioner had provided several feature articles and full-length interviews about her work published in major national newspapers in Nepal, including the number-one ranked national newspaper with daily circulation of 350,000, as well as television appearances, satisfying criterion iii.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-16_01_B2203; source_row=22034 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
Reference letters summarized the Petitioner's career and used conclusory language about significance without explaining how his contributions actually influenced or impacted the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Reference letters summarized the Petitioner's career and used conclusory language about significance without explaining how his contributions actually influenced or impacted the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-14_01_B2203; source_row=22026 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Petitioner did not identify a qualifying organization or establishment, did not sufficiently demonstrate how his role was leading or critical, and did not show that the festivals had a distinguished reputation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner did not identify a qualifying organization or establishment, did not sufficiently demonstrate how his role was leading or critical, and did not show that the festivals had a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-14_01_B2203; source_row=22028 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner paid only $83,102 against the $85,862 proffered wage, leaving a $2,759.98 shortfall. No regulatory-prescribed evidence covering 2016 was submitted: the parent's 2015 tax return predated the priority date and contradicted the disregarded-entity claim; the CFO letter was inadmissible because the Petitioner employs fewer than 100 workers; and the unaudited financial statements were unacceptable.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner paid only $83,102 against the $85,862 proffered wage, leaving a $2,759.98 shortfall. No regulatory-prescribed evidence covering 2016 was submitted: the parent's 2015 tax return predated the priority date and contradicted the disregarded-entity claim; the CFO letter was inadmissible because the Petitioner employs fewer than 100 workers; and the unaudited financial statements were unacceptable. The 2017 wage payments alone do not satisfy the continuing-ability-to-pay requirement. The Petitioner also failed to account for its obligation to pay multiple I-140 beneficiaries.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-14_01_B5203; source_row=22031 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The sole experience letter was a photocopy omitting the employer's address as required by regulation, and the typeface inconsistency raised authenticity doubts. The Petitioner therefore did not establish that the Beneficiary had the required six months of experience by the priority date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The sole experience letter was a photocopy omitting the employer's address as required by regulation, and the typeface inconsistency raised authenticity doubts. The Petitioner therefore did not establish that the Beneficiary had the required six months of experience by the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-11-14_01_B5203; source_row=22032 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c