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 16621–16630
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherFaculty
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Portuguese-language magazine article lacked a full English translation, did not appear to be about the Petitioner, and lacked evidence the publication is major media. Additional event photos and broadcast references lacked transcripts, title/date/author information, and proof of major media status.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Portuguese-language magazine article lacked a full English translation, did not appear to be about the Petitioner, and lacked evidence the publication is major media. Additional event photos and broadcast references lacked transcripts, title/date/author information, and proof of major media status.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-13_02_B2203; source_row=21779 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found that the record showed invitations and requests but lacked evidence that the Petitioner actually evaluated the posters or papers. Letters regarding conference panels did not elaborate on duties sufficient to show judging of others' work, and new evidence submitted on appeal post-dated the petition filing.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the record showed invitations and requests but lacked evidence that the Petitioner actually evaluated the posters or papers. Letters regarding conference panels did not elaborate on duties sufficient to show judging of others' work, and new evidence submitted on appeal post-dated the petition filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-13_01_B2203; source_row=21772 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Physics
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that while citations indicate interest from the field, the Petitioner did not sufficiently identify what contributions he made through his publications or explain their 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 while citations indicate interest from the field, the Petitioner did not sufficiently identify what contributions he made through his publications or explain their significance. Recommendation letters focused on his institutional contributions and unique skill set rather than demonstrating field-wide major significance, and merely describing prolific publication without explaining major influence is insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-13_01_B2203; source_row=21773 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Petitioner did not contest the Director's denial of this criterion on appeal, so AAO did not further address it. AAO noted that informal instruction and evaluation of students does not meet the criterion.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner did not contest the Director's denial of this criterion on appeal, so AAO did not further address it. AAO noted that informal instruction and evaluation of students does not meet the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-13_02_B2203; source_row=21780 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Physics
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 satisfy the threshold requirement of meeting at least three criteria. In advisory dicta, AAO noted the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
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 satisfy the threshold requirement of meeting at least three criteria. In advisory dicta, AAO noted the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-13_01_B2203; source_row=21776 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed that bank statements are not among the enumerated forms of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and do not demonstrate sustainable ability to pay. The amended tax return showing $31,488 net income was insufficient because the Petitioner also had a pending I-140 for a second beneficiary, and no evidence of that second beneficiary's wages was in the record.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that bank statements are not among the enumerated forms of evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(2) and do not demonstrate sustainable ability to pay. The amended tax return showing $31,488 net income was insufficient because the Petitioner also had a pending I-140 for a second beneficiary, and no evidence of that second beneficiary's wages was in the record. The totality-of-circumstances analysis under Matter of Sonegawa also failed.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-08_01_B5203; source_row=21770 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
AAO withdrew the Director's finding, concluding that the record lacked documentary evidence showing the number of watches sold, revenue generated, or impact on the custom watch industry. Letters of support contained primarily conclusory attestations of talent rather than specific examples of contributions of major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the Director's finding, concluding that the record lacked documentary evidence showing the number of watches sold, revenue generated, or impact on the custom watch industry. Letters of support contained primarily conclusory attestations of talent rather than specific examples of contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-07_01_B2203; source_row=21767 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
None of the submitted publications qualified as major trade publications or major media. The profiles lacked proper authorship attribution, and the evidence did not establish that any of the outlets had sufficient reach or prominence to qualify. The video evidence lacked required title, date, author, and broadcast attribution.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
None of the submitted publications qualified as major trade publications or major media. The profiles lacked proper authorship attribution, and the evidence did not establish that any of the outlets had sufficient reach or prominence to qualify. The video evidence lacked required title, date, author, and broadcast attribution.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-09-07_01_B2203; source_row=21766 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c