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 1841–1850
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility under the first prong, making the third prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility under the first prong, making the third prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-19_04_B5203; source_row=42440 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility under the first prong, making the second prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility under the first prong, making the second prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-19_04_B5203; source_row=42439 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The glassdoor.com survey was based on only 20 submitted wages and did not differentiate by region, experience, or employer type, making it an invalid comparison. The salario.com survey covered a period eight years after the Petitioner's employment, did not differentiate by geography, employer type, or experience level, and provided no salary ranges or percentiles to show whether the difference was sufficiently significant.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The glassdoor.com survey was based on only 20 submitted wages and did not differentiate by region, experience, or employer type, making it an invalid comparison. The salario.com survey covered a period eight years after the Petitioner's employment, did not differentiate by geography, employer type, or experience level, and provided no salary ranges or percentiles to show whether the difference was sufficiently significant.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_01_B2203; source_row=42393 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The ISSA bylaws show membership is based on interest or active involvement in information security, not on outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. The Director did not impose a novel evidentiary requirement by requiring the Petitioner to satisfy the plain language of the regulation. The Petitioner's Loper Bright argument was also unpersuasive as that decision affects courts, not agencies.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The ISSA bylaws show membership is based on interest or active involvement in information security, not on outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. The Director did not impose a novel evidentiary requirement by requiring the Petitioner to satisfy the plain language of the regulation. The Petitioner's Loper Bright argument was also unpersuasive as that decision affects courts, not agencies.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_03_B2203; source_row=42404 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO withdrew the Director's finding because the record did not demonstrate whether or where the papers were published, and the identifying information indicated they were written to fulfill graduate program course requirements, not published in professional or major trade publications or other major media as required by the regulation.
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 withdrew the Director's finding because the record did not demonstrate whether or where the papers were published, and the identifying information indicated they were written to fulfill graduate program course requirements, not published in professional or major trade publications or other major media as required by the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_03_B2203; source_row=42407 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 agrees the endeavor has substantial merit but not national importance. The submitted articles speak to the general value of the field rather than the Beneficiary's specific endeavor; the recommendation and expert letters emphasize past accomplishments or industry-wide benefits without demonstrating broader impact of the Beneficiary's role; and the Petitioner did not show the position would create U.S.…
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 agrees the endeavor has substantial merit but not national importance. The submitted articles speak to the general value of the field rather than the Beneficiary's specific endeavor; the recommendation and expert letters emphasize past accomplishments or industry-wide benefits without demonstrating broader impact of the Beneficiary's role; and the Petitioner did not show the position would create U.S. jobs or yield substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_01_B5203; source_row=42394 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The articles and letters did not connect his specific endeavor to broader national impacts; the recommendation letters spoke to his professional competence (relevant to prong 2) rather than the endeavor's national importance. Working in or starting a business in a field subject to government regulation is not itself sufficient to show national importance.
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 articles and letters did not connect his specific endeavor to broader national impacts; the recommendation letters spoke to his professional competence (relevant to prong 2) rather than the endeavor's national importance. Working in or starting a business in a field subject to government regulation is not itself sufficient to show national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_02_B5203; source_row=42401 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The professional credential is not a prize or award but a registration credential. The ceramics certificate and scholarship were awarded to art students, not practicing art therapists, and thus are not prizes in the beneficiary's field. Furthermore, the prizes are limited to students within a single school or a small local area and do not reflect national or international recognition.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The professional credential is not a prize or award but a registration credential. The ceramics certificate and scholarship were awarded to art students, not practicing art therapists, and thus are not prizes in the beneficiary's field. Furthermore, the prizes are limited to students within a single school or a small local area and do not reflect national or international recognition.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_02_B2203; source_row=42397 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c