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 18631–18640
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
AAO agreed the criterion was not met but criticized the director for improperly comparing citation counts to gauge whether the petitioner is at the 'very top of his field,' which is a step-2 final merits consideration, not a step-1 criterion analysis.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the criterion was not met but criticized the director for improperly comparing citation counts to gauge whether the petitioner is at the 'very top of his field,' which is a step-2 final merits consideration, not a step-1 criterion analysis. AAO found the citations, recommendation letters, and conference presentations insufficient to demonstrate contributions of major significance: the letters were vague and conclusory, failed to explain how the petitioner's work had already influenced the field as a whole, and much of the described impact was framed in terms of future or potential significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-28_01_B2203; source_row=19639 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO stated that, while a full final merits determination was not required because the petitioner failed step 1, a review of the aggregate evidence nonetheless supports a finding that the petitioner has not demonstrated the level of expertise required.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO stated that, while a full final merits determination was not required because the petitioner failed step 1, a review of the aggregate evidence nonetheless supports a finding that the petitioner has not demonstrated the level of expertise required.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-28_01_B2203; source_row=19641 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Both the director and AAO found that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence establishing authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.
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 +
Both the director and AAO found that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence establishing authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-28_01_B2203; source_row=19640 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that letters from the Creative Director and from a company executive asserting the petitioner performed in a critical role—contributing to the company's substantial rise, brand recognition, signing of a celebrity spokesperson, and increase in web traffic—met the plain language requirements of this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that letters from the Creative Director and from a company executive asserting the petitioner performed in a critical role—contributing to the company's substantial rise, brand recognition, signing of a celebrity spokesperson, and increase in web traffic—met the plain language requirements of this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-27_01_B2203; source_row=19636 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the totality of evidence—exhibitions in Japan, major media coverage in Japan, critical role for an internationally recognized denim designer, and imitation of her designs—established that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of her field with sustained national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the totality of evidence—exhibitions in Japan, major media coverage in Japan, critical role for an internationally recognized denim designer, and imitation of her designs—established that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of her field with sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-27_01_B2203; source_row=19637 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
With the new evidence of circulation and distribution statistics submitted on appeal, the petitioner demonstrated that the publication qualifies as major media, satisfying this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
With the new evidence of circulation and distribution statistics submitted on appeal, the petitioner demonstrated that the publication qualifies as major media, satisfying this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-27_01_B2203; source_row=19634 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(D))
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner's pre-filing earnings of roughly $59,010-$60,963 were substantially below the Level 4 prevailing wages for relevant engineering occupations, and post-filing earnings, future profit-sharing arrangements, and the spouse's partnership income could not establish eligibility at the time of filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner's pre-filing earnings of roughly $59,010-$60,963 were substantially below the Level 4 prevailing wages for relevant engineering occupations, and post-filing earnings, future profit-sharing arrangements, and the spouse's partnership income could not establish eligibility at the time of filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-25_01_B5203; source_row=19632 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
Why AAO was not persuaded
The support letters, including the new letter about HBB technology, describe the petitioner's expertise and contributions to particular employers/clients but do not document recognition or impact on the broader industry or field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The support letters, including the new letter about HBB technology, describe the petitioner's expertise and contributions to particular employers/clients but do not document recognition or impact on the broader industry or field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-08-25_01_B5203; source_row=19633 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c