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.
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
The certificates indicated participation and acknowledgment at exhibitions but did not show how the Petitioner's work impacted the field. The recommendation letters praised her skills but failed to explain how her contributions rose to a level of major significance. Conclusory attestations without specific examples of field-wide impact are insufficient.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The certificates indicated participation and acknowledgment at exhibitions but did not show how the Petitioner's work impacted the field. The recommendation letters praised her skills but failed to explain how her contributions rose to a level of major significance. Conclusory attestations without specific examples of field-wide impact are insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-04-10_01_B2203; source_row=21257 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found that none of the submitted awards were sufficiently supported by independent, objective evidence of national or international recognition for excellence. The certificate lacked supporting documentation, the shortlist did not constitute receipt of an award, the honorable mention lacked independent corroboration of its national/international recognition, and the symposium prize was insufficiently documented as a…
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 none of the submitted awards were sufficiently supported by independent, objective evidence of national or international recognition for excellence. The certificate lacked supporting documentation, the shortlist did not constitute receipt of an award, the honorable mention lacked independent corroboration of its national/international recognition, and the symposium prize was insufficiently documented as a recognized award for excellence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-04-10_01_B2203; source_row=21255 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
The AAO found that the Petitioner submitted an interview transcript published in a major media outlet and provided documentation establishing it as major media, thereby satisfying this criterion.
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 submitted an interview transcript published in a major media outlet and provided documentation establishing it as major media, thereby satisfying this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-04-10_01_B2203; source_row=21256 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to conduct a full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
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 full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the threshold of three criteria, but noted in passing that the aggregate record does not support the required level of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-04-10_01_B2203; source_row=21260 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Whether provisional certificate constitutes official academic record of degree for purposes of five-year experience calculation
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO held that EB-2 regulations refer to 'degrees' rather than 'diplomas,' and that an 'official academic record' under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) is not limited to a formal diploma.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO held that EB-2 regulations refer to 'degrees' rather than 'diplomas,' and that an 'official academic record' under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) is not limited to a formal diploma. After a case-specific analysis of the provisional certificate, statement of marks, registrar's letter, and AACRAO EDGE data, AAO concluded the provisional certificate evidenced completion of all substantive degree requirements and university approval as of August 2006, making it the operative date for the five-year calculation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-04-06_01_B5203; source_row=21254 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer and labor certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner indicated she already has a job, and the record did not explain why obtaining a labor certification would be impractical. She also failed to demonstrate her work would serve an urgent national interest or that her contributions were of such value that a waiver would be beneficial to the United States.
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 indicated she already has a job, and the record did not explain why obtaining a labor certification would be impractical. She also failed to demonstrate her work would serve an urgent national interest or that her contributions were of such value that a waiver would be beneficial to the United States.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2017-03-31_02_B5203; source_row=21251 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c