Source-backed decision research

Explore how AAO evaluates evidence.

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.

Clear filters

10,847 decisions / 36,849 findings

Showing 18511860

EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Membership

membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements

Why AAO was not persuaded

The honor societies are open to students in any field and are not specific to art or rehabilitation therapy. Membership is based on undergraduate GPA rather than outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts in the relevant field.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
The honor societies are open to students in any field and are not specific to art or rehabilitation therapy. Membership is based on undergraduate GPA rather than outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts in the relevant field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_02_B2203; source_row=42398
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Leading / critical role

leading or critical role

Why the evidence was persuasive

Both the Director and AAO agreed that criterion viii was satisfied.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
Both the Director and AAO agreed that criterion viii was satisfied.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_01_B2203; source_row=42392
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

What the decision said

AAO reserved judgment on criterion iv because, even if met, the Petitioner could satisfy at most two criteria (iv and viii), which is still fewer than the required three.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved judgment on criterion iv because, even if met, the Petitioner could satisfy at most two criteria (iv and viii), which is still fewer than the required three.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_01_B2203; source_row=42391
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found the Director overlooked detailed expert letters establishing the originality and major significance of the Petitioner's pedestrian flow models and polymer-predicting software, both based on AI/machine learning. The letters were consistent, credible, uncontroverted, and supported by other evidence.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director overlooked detailed expert letters establishing the originality and major significance of the Petitioner's pedestrian flow models and polymer-predicting software, both based on AI/machine learning. The letters were consistent, credible, uncontroverted, and supported by other evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_05_B2203; source_row=42424
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AotherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

other

intent to continue work in field of extraordinary ability in the United States

Why AAO was not persuaded

Petitioner's only evidence was a fellowship agreement that expired in September 2023; the record otherwise lacked evidence of intent to continue working in the machine learning field after obtaining permanent residence.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
Petitioner's only evidence was a fellowship agreement that expired in September 2023; the record otherwise lacked evidence of intent to continue working in the machine learning field after obtaining permanent residence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_05_B2203; source_row=42427
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO did not disturb the Director's finding that criterion (v) was met.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
The AAO did not disturb the Director's finding that criterion (v) was met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_03_B2203; source_row=42406
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

What the decision said

The Petitioner did not submit evidence in support of this criterion, did not address it in his RFE response, and did not contest the Director's determination on appeal, so it is waived.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not submit evidence in support of this criterion, did not address it in his RFE response, and did not contest the Director's determination on appeal, so it is waived.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_03_B2203; source_row=42405
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AotherEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

other

field of extraordinary ability falls within sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO held the Petitioner's clarified plan was not a material change and that his consulting/advisory work falls within the statutory field of 'business.'

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO held the Petitioner's clarified plan was not a material change and that his consulting/advisory work falls within the statutory field of 'business.'
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_04_B2203; source_row=42412
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

authorship of scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found the article, with references and endnotes, was written for learned persons in the legal profession and published in a professional publication.

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 found the article, with references and endnotes, was written for learned persons in the legal profession and published in a professional publication.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_04_B2203; source_row=42417
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

participation as a judge of the work of others

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found the record demonstrated peer review consistent with USCIS Policy Manual examples, with the Petitioner given license to edit and revise content based on his subject-matter expertise rather than acting as a proofreader.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO found the record demonstrated peer review consistent with USCIS Policy Manual examples, with the Petitioner given license to edit and revise content based on his subject-matter expertise rather than acting as a proofreader.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-12-18_04_B2203; source_row=42416
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment