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 17641–17650
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIMaster’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
serving the national interest to a substantially greater degree than an available U.S. worker
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the Petitioner has not claimed or established that he has influenced his field of endeavor. His business activities and ITS designs have not been widely emulated, have not increased economic activity at a national level, and the letters from customers describe contract work without demonstrating influence on the industry as a whole.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Petitioner has not claimed or established that he has influenced his field of endeavor. His business activities and ITS designs have not been widely emulated, have not increased economic activity at a national level, and the letters from customers describe contract work without demonstrating influence on the industry as a whole.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-15_01_B5203; source_row=20690 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Director addressed the wrong classification; the Petitioner sought exceptional ability in business, not advanced degree professional status, and the record shows he met at least three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability.
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 Director addressed the wrong classification; the Petitioner sought exceptional ability in business, not advanced degree professional status, and the record shows he met at least three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-15_01_B5203; source_row=20687 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIMaster’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial intrinsic merit
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's work as an entrepreneur and owner of a small business providing cabling, networking, security, and telecommunications services is in an area of substantial intrinsic merit.
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 agreed that the Petitioner's work as an entrepreneur and owner of a small business providing cabling, networking, security, and telecommunications services is in an area of substantial intrinsic merit.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-15_01_B5203; source_row=20688 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesResearch Scientist10 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that citation numbers (~125 total, with the highest-cited article at ~46 citations) demonstrated awareness of the Petitioner's work but not contributions of major significance; conference presentations lacked evidence of frequent citation or field-wide impact; commercial product references lacked supporting evidence of extent of contribution; the fellowship was for training purposes rather than evidence of major c…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that citation numbers (~125 total, with the highest-cited article at ~46 citations) demonstrated awareness of the Petitioner's work but not contributions of major significance; conference presentations lacked evidence of frequent citation or field-wide impact; commercial product references lacked supporting evidence of extent of contribution; the fellowship was for training purposes rather than evidence of major contributions; expert letters described future or potential impact rather than demonstrated current impact; and on-appeal letters praised the work without explaining how it significantly impacted the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-13_01_B2203; source_row=20670 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Biomedical / Life SciencesResearch Scientist10 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO stated it need not conduct a formal final merits determination given the failure to meet three criteria, but observed in dicta that the aggregate record does not show the Petitioner has established the requisite 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 stated it need not conduct a formal final merits determination given the failure to meet three criteria, but observed in dicta that the aggregate record does not show the Petitioner has established the requisite level of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-13_01_B2203; source_row=20672 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner did not establish that the standard criteria do not readily apply to the occupation, nor explain how kosher-law knowledge is comparable. Even considering such knowledge, a shortage of similarly skilled workers is a basis for labor certification, not evidence of exceptional ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner did not establish that the standard criteria do not readily apply to the occupation, nor explain how kosher-law knowledge is comparable. Even considering such knowledge, a shortage of similarly skilled workers is a basis for labor certification, not evidence of exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-13_01_B5203; source_row=20679 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary's diploma qualifying him as a technologist of public catering, equated to an associate's degree in culinary arts, meets the plain language of this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Beneficiary's diploma qualifying him as a technologist of public catering, equated to an associate's degree in culinary arts, meets the plain language of this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-09-13_01_B5203; source_row=20673 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c