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.
ability to pay proffered wage to beneficiary and all other I-140 beneficiaries
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO concludes the Petitioner's chart still fails to accurately identify all beneficiaries with pending or approved I-140s as of the priority date; USCIS records show additional approved petitions and mischaracterized statuses, and no proffered/actual wage evidence exists for many of these beneficiaries, making the ability-to-pay analysis impossible.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concludes the Petitioner's chart still fails to accurately identify all beneficiaries with pending or approved I-140s as of the priority date; USCIS records show additional approved petitions and mischaracterized statuses, and no proffered/actual wage evidence exists for many of these beneficiaries, making the ability-to-pay analysis impossible.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-29_01_B5203; source_row=21536 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
foreign equivalent of U.S. master's in computer science or engineering
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO finds the credentials evaluation deficient because it did not analyze the curriculum against U.S. master's-in-computer-science requirements and identified no comparable U.S. program; the issuing institution itself offers a separate M.Tech in computer science distinct from the MCA, and EDGE confirms the MCA is not equivalent to a computer science master's.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds the credentials evaluation deficient because it did not analyze the curriculum against U.S. master's-in-computer-science requirements and identified no comparable U.S. program; the issuing institution itself offers a separate M.Tech in computer science distinct from the MCA, and EDGE confirms the MCA is not equivalent to a computer science master's.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-29_01_B5203; source_row=21535 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner did not provide documentary evidence showing that the relevant federation and swim teams required outstanding achievements of their members as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner did not provide documentary evidence showing that the relevant federation and swim teams required outstanding achievements of their members as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B2203; source_row=21525 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner did not show how his roles in the national federation or national team were leading or critical, as he failed to differentiate his role from other members or show impact on the organizations' standing. Although AAO found he performed a leading or critical role on his university swim team, that team's distinguished reputation was not established, failing the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner did not show how his roles in the national federation or national team were leading or critical, as he failed to differentiate his role from other members or show impact on the organizations' standing. Although AAO found he performed a leading or critical role on his university swim team, that team's distinguished reputation was not established, failing the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B2203; source_row=21529 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of the alien's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner listed this criterion on appeal but provided no further argument or documentation, and submitted no qualifying evidence of display at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner listed this criterion on appeal but provided no further argument or documentation, and submitted no qualifying evidence of display at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B2203; source_row=21528 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
Most submitted articles were about swim meets rather than the Petitioner himself; for articles that were about the Petitioner, neither the publication names/dates nor evidence of major media status were provided. No submitted publication was demonstrated to be a form of major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Most submitted articles were about swim meets rather than the Petitioner himself; for articles that were about the Petitioner, neither the publication names/dates nor evidence of major media status were provided. No submitted publication was demonstrated to be a form of major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B2203; source_row=21526 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 in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that coaching athletes who succeeded at the state or junior level, and being one of the first (not the originator) to use a swimming technique in one country without evidence of broader adoption at the top level, did not rise to original contributions of major significance. The letters were largely conclusory and uncorroborated.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that coaching athletes who succeeded at the state or junior level, and being one of the first (not the originator) to use a swimming technique in one country without evidence of broader adoption at the top level, did not rise to original contributions of major significance. The letters were largely conclusory and uncorroborated.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B2203; source_row=21527 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner submitted no information explaining why a labor certification would be impractical, why the U.S. would benefit despite available U.S. workers, or why urgency warranted forgoing the labor certification process.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted no information explaining why a labor certification would be impractical, why the U.S. would benefit despite available U.S. workers, or why urgency warranted forgoing the labor certification process.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B5203; source_row=21533 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient details about the size, location, staffing, target population, or research topics of the proposed clinic to establish its prospective impact.
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 +
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient details about the size, location, staffing, target population, or research topics of the proposed clinic to establish its prospective impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_02_B5203; source_row=21531 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that reviewing the totality of the evidence, including judging, contributions, citations, and instrument development role, the Petitioner had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or that he was among the small percentage at the very top of his field. Expert letters described promising work but not work of major significance or commensurate with extraordinary ability recognition.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that reviewing the totality of the evidence, including judging, contributions, citations, and instrument development role, the Petitioner had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or that he was among the small percentage at the very top of his field. Expert letters described promising work but not work of major significance or commensurate with extraordinary ability recognition.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-06-28_01_B2203; source_row=21522 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c