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.
authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that Science and Life covers a wide range of topics beyond the Petitioner's field of business and entrepreneurship, and therefore is not intended for learned persons in the Petitioner's field as required. The breadth of subject matter in the publication—spanning alcohol studies, PE teaching, library management, and more—precluded a finding that it qualifies as a professional publication in the Petitioner's field.
Why this is useful
See how AAO evaluated whether the work qualified as scholarly authorship and what it showed in the full record.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that Science and Life covers a wide range of topics beyond the Petitioner's field of business and entrepreneurship, and therefore is not intended for learned persons in the Petitioner's field as required. The breadth of subject matter in the publication—spanning alcohol studies, PE teaching, library management, and more—precluded a finding that it qualifies as a professional publication in the Petitioner's field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_02_B2203; source_row=42685 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the support letters showed the Petitioner's 'one-stop-shop' strategy benefited individual clients and businesses, but none demonstrated major significance in the field. The Petitioner failed to provide objective corroboration of financial and job-creation claims, and the business plan itself was merely another iteration of unsubstantiated claims.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the support letters showed the Petitioner's 'one-stop-shop' strategy benefited individual clients and businesses, but none demonstrated major significance in the field. The Petitioner failed to provide objective corroboration of financial and job-creation claims, and the business plan itself was merely another iteration of unsubstantiated claims.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_02_B2203; source_row=42684 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
High salary or remuneration relative to others in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although the salary statistics showed the Petitioner's salary was higher than the average accountant's, the Petitioner's actual position was Regional Accounting Manager with significant management responsibilities, not purely an accountant. The comparative data for accountants therefore did not apply to the position she actually held.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Although the salary statistics showed the Petitioner's salary was higher than the average accountant's, the Petitioner's actual position was Regional Accounting Manager with significant management responsibilities, not purely an accountant. The comparative data for accountants therefore did not apply to the position she actually held.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_01_B2203; source_row=42675 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the Director that the evidence was insufficient. The Petitioner's limited citation record, reliance on comparison to broader engineering fields rather than electrical engineering specifically, lack of independent research funding, prospective job offer post-dating the filing, and recommendation letters lacking specificity about field impact collectively failed to demonstrate a record of success or that she i…
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Director that the evidence was insufficient. The Petitioner's limited citation record, reliance on comparison to broader engineering fields rather than electrical engineering specifically, lack of independent research funding, prospective job offer post-dating the filing, and recommendation letters lacking specificity about field impact collectively failed to demonstrate a record of success or that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_01_B5203; source_row=42679 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
Salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's documented salary was as a film and video machinist, not as a set and exhibit designer, so it could not demonstrate exceptional ability in his claimed area of expertise.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's documented salary was as a film and video machinist, not as a set and exhibit designer, so it could not demonstrate exceptional ability in his claimed area of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_05_B5203; source_row=42698 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner did not demonstrate ABRACOPEL has a membership body comprised of individuals with a U.S. baccalaureate degree or equivalent. Additionally, the membership declaration was dated after the petition was filed, so it could not establish eligibility at the time of filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not demonstrate ABRACOPEL has a membership body comprised of individuals with a U.S. baccalaureate degree or equivalent. Additionally, the membership declaration was dated after the petition was filed, so it could not establish eligibility at the time of filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_05_B5203; source_row=42699 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
high salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO noted the petitioner's brief promised new documents that were not actually submitted, and the salary-comparison claims from paylab.com and payscale.com were unsubstantiated assertions of counsel rather than evidence.
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 brief promised new documents that were not actually submitted, and the salary-comparison claims from paylab.com and payscale.com were unsubstantiated assertions of counsel rather than evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_04_B5203; source_row=42692 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
AAO had previously determined that the Petitioner's endeavor was substantially meritorious but did not establish national importance. The additional articles submitted did not change this conclusion, and a shortage of workers in an occupation does not render the endeavor nationally important under Dhanasar.
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 +
AAO had previously determined that the Petitioner's endeavor was substantially meritorious but did not establish national importance. The additional articles submitted did not change this conclusion, and a shortage of workers in an occupation does not render the endeavor nationally important under Dhanasar.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_02_B5203; source_row=42687 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner in professional or major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that articles lacking cited authors fail the plain-language requirement of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), which specifies evidence 'shall include the title, date, and author of the material.' AAO also rejected the argument that post-filing publication dates could be disregarded, as 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1) requires eligibility at the time of filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that articles lacking cited authors fail the plain-language requirement of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), which specifies evidence 'shall include the title, date, and author of the material.' AAO also rejected the argument that post-filing publication dates could be disregarded, as 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1) requires eligibility at the time of filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-01-15_02_B2203; source_row=42683 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c