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 18171–18180
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial intrinsic merit
Why the evidence was persuasive
Both the director and AAO found that the Petitioner's work as a physician in cardiology is in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. AAO explicitly stated this was established and moved on to the remaining prongs.
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 +
Both the director and AAO found that the Petitioner's work as a physician in cardiology is in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. AAO explicitly stated this was established and moved on to the remaining prongs.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-12_01_B5203; source_row=20127 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the evidence was a limited and selective comparison that did not establish the Petitioner commanded a high salary relative to others in the field as a whole, and there was no objective earnings data for broader comparison.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the evidence was a limited and selective comparison that did not establish the Petitioner commanded a high salary relative to others in the field as a whole, and there was no objective earnings data for broader comparison.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_01_B2203; source_row=20091 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the letters made general statements without specific information establishing a leading or critical role, and the Petitioner provided no documentation to establish the distinguished reputation of the organizations.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the letters made general statements without specific information establishing a leading or critical role, and the Petitioner provided no documentation to establish the distinguished reputation of the organizations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_01_B2203; source_row=20090 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that some articles were not 'about' the petitioner as required, some lacked sufficient author identification, and the documentation regarding publication status was inconsistent and unreliable. Circulation figures provided were not demonstrated to be reflective 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 that some articles were not 'about' the petitioner as required, some lacked sufficient author identification, and the documentation regarding publication status was inconsistent and unreliable. Circulation figures provided were not demonstrated to be reflective of major media status.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_01_B2203; source_row=20087 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EDGE, treated by federal courts as a reliable peer-reviewed source, rates the dyplom tytul magister inzynier as equivalent to only a U.S. bachelor's degree. The submitted credential evaluations conflicted with EDGE and with each other, and counsel's unsupported attack on EDGE's reliability did not constitute evidence.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
EDGE, treated by federal courts as a reliable peer-reviewed source, rates the dyplom tytul magister inzynier as equivalent to only a U.S. bachelor's degree. The submitted credential evaluations conflicted with EDGE and with each other, and counsel's unsupported attack on EDGE's reliability did not constitute evidence. The Beneficiary also lacked the requisite five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_07_B5203; source_row=20120 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary holds an advanced degree (or foreign equivalent), or a U.S. bachelor's/foreign equivalent plus 5 years progressive experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO concluded the combined credentials produce only the 'equivalent' of a bachelor's degree, not a single foreign equivalent degree, and EDGE confirms the Bachelor of Computer Applications is comparable to only two to three years of U.S. university study.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded the combined credentials produce only the 'equivalent' of a bachelor's degree, not a single foreign equivalent degree, and EDGE confirms the Bachelor of Computer Applications is comparable to only two to three years of U.S. university study.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_04_B5203; source_row=20106 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO reserved the full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy three criteria, but noted in the aggregate the evidence 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 reserved the full final merits determination because the Petitioner did not satisfy three criteria, but noted in the aggregate the evidence does not support the required level of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_01_B2203; source_row=20092 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
intent to continue work in area of expertise in the U.S.
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner's single letter lacked specific plans and no supporting documentation such as prospective employer letters or prearranged contracts was submitted, failing to meet the 'clear evidence' standard of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5).
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's single letter lacked specific plans and no supporting documentation such as prospective employer letters or prearranged contracts was submitted, failing to meet the 'clear evidence' standard of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_01_B2203; source_row=20093 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
While the Petitioner's net income in 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 exceeded the proffered wage, the Petitioner had at least one other pending I-140 petition and failed to provide any information about that other petition. Without knowing the proffered wage for the other beneficiary and whether that petition remained active, USCIS could not determine whether the Petitioner could pay all its sponsored beneficiaries.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
While the Petitioner's net income in 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 exceeded the proffered wage, the Petitioner had at least one other pending I-140 petition and failed to provide any information about that other petition. Without knowing the proffered wage for the other beneficiary and whether that petition remained active, USCIS could not determine whether the Petitioner could pay all its sponsored beneficiaries.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2016-02-09_07_B5203; source_row=20122 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c