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.
display of the alien's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner failed to raise this criterion before the director and instead asserted it on appeal. AAO found the letters submitted only confirmed works were archived, not displayed, and the petitioner provided no evidence that archived items are on public display.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner failed to raise this criterion before the director and instead asserted it on appeal. AAO found the letters submitted only confirmed works were archived, not displayed, and the petitioner provided no evidence that archived items are on public display.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19550 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner did not raise this criterion before the director, and on appeal only mentioned salary in the context of a final merits determination. There was no comparative salary evidence to establish the beneficiary's compensation was high in relation to others in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner did not raise this criterion before the director, and on appeal only mentioned salary in the context of a final merits determination. There was no comparative salary evidence to establish the beneficiary's compensation was high in relation to others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19552 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the submitted articles were not about the beneficiary personally, a website biography lacked evidence of qualifying as major media, and the key article from a qualifying major media outlet neither focused on the beneficiary nor listed an author as required by the regulation.
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 submitted articles were not about the beneficiary personally, a website biography lacked evidence of qualifying as major media, and the key article from a qualifying major media outlet neither focused on the beneficiary nor listed an author as required by the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19549 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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
The petitioner argued that evidence submitted for the membership criterion also satisfies this criterion, but AAO rejected this, noting the criteria are separate and distinct. AAO found no documentary evidence that the petitioner's athletic activities have affected the field in a major way, widely influenced other runners, or otherwise constitute original contributions of major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner argued that evidence submitted for the membership criterion also satisfies this criterion, but AAO rejected this, noting the criteria are separate and distinct. AAO found no documentary evidence that the petitioner's athletic activities have affected the field in a major way, widely influenced other runners, or otherwise constitute original contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_01_B2203; source_row=19539 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 found that the petitioner's evidence of prizes, Olympic team membership, and published material all dated to 2009 or earlier, with nothing demonstrating sustained acclaim up to the petition's 2014 filing date. Wikipedia content was given little weight. The totality of evidence did not establish the petitioner as among the small percentage at the very 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 that the petitioner's evidence of prizes, Olympic team membership, and published material all dated to 2009 or earlier, with nothing demonstrating sustained acclaim up to the petition's 2014 filing date. Wikipedia content was given little weight. The totality of evidence did not establish the petitioner as among the small percentage at the very top of her field with sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_01_B2203; source_row=19540 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
What the decision said
The petitioner did not contest the director's findings on this criterion on appeal and offered no additional discussion, resulting in abandonment of the claim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner did not contest the director's findings on this criterion on appeal and offered no additional discussion, resulting in abandonment of the claim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19548 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the director that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence establishing the beneficiary received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the director that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence establishing the beneficiary received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19547 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 or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed with the director that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence of the beneficiary's leading or critical roles for the petitioner and another organization.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the director that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence of the beneficiary's leading or critical roles for the petitioner and another organization.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-07-22_03_B2203; source_row=19551 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c