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.
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Congressional Recognition certificate reflected only local recognition; the county commendation was filed after the petition date and also reflected only local recognition; the CNKI data report did not identify the specific journal or its readership; and the Baidu search engine data did not identify the original source of the information.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Congressional Recognition certificate reflected only local recognition; the county commendation was filed after the petition date and also reflected only local recognition; the CNKI data report did not identify the specific journal or its readership; and the Baidu search engine data did not identify the original source of the information. None of the awards were shown to be nationally or internationally recognized at the required level.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=19418 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
There was no objective comparative evidence showing the magazine's circulation relative to other publications. The television interview did not constitute 'published material about the alien' as required by the regulatory plain language, and the petitioner did not submit a complete transcript demonstrating the interview was about her work.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
There was no objective comparative evidence showing the magazine's circulation relative to other publications. The television interview did not constitute 'published material about the alien' as required by the regulatory plain language, and the petitioner did not submit a complete transcript demonstrating the interview was about her work.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=19420 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
commercial successes in the performing arts
Why AAO was not persuaded
The event programs reflected performances after the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility at the time of filing. Additionally, the petitioner submitted no sales figures or receipts demonstrating commercial success.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The event programs reflected performances after the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility at the time of filing. Additionally, the petitioner submitted no sales figures or receipts demonstrating commercial success.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=19426 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO stated it need not provide a formal final merits determination because the petitioner failed the step-1 threshold, but noted in dicta that the aggregate evidence does not support 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 stated it need not provide a formal final merits determination because the petitioner failed the step-1 threshold, but noted in dicta that the aggregate evidence does not support sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=19427 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO agreed that the petitioner's expert letters were largely vague, conclusory, or forward-looking, and that the citation record (59 total citations across 7 articles, with some uncited) did not demonstrate an impact consistent with a contribution of major significance. Individual letters did not provide specific examples of how the petitioner's work significantly impacted the field at large.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The AAO agreed that the petitioner's expert letters were largely vague, conclusory, or forward-looking, and that the citation record (59 total citations across 7 articles, with some uncited) did not demonstrate an impact consistent with a contribution of major significance. Individual letters did not provide specific examples of how the petitioner's work significantly impacted the field at large.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-08_01_B2203; source_row=19415 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found that neither the travel award (given to 21 new investigators) nor the selection as one of 400 poster presenters constituted a nationally or internationally recognized prize for excellence. Evidence of qualified judges and a prestigious issuing entity alone does not establish national or international recognition; there was no media coverage or wider field recognition beyond the petitioner's employer.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that neither the travel award (given to 21 new investigators) nor the selection as one of 400 poster presenters constituted a nationally or internationally recognized prize for excellence. Evidence of qualified judges and a prestigious issuing entity alone does not establish national or international recognition; there was no media coverage or wider field recognition beyond the petitioner's employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-08_01_B2203; source_row=19411 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesResearch Scientist
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
The AAO explicitly declined to reach a formal final merits determination because the petitioner did not clear the step-1 threshold, while noting in dicta that the aggregate evidence would not support the classification.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO explicitly declined to reach a formal final merits determination because the petitioner did not clear the step-1 threshold, while noting in dicta that the aggregate evidence would not support the classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-08_01_B2203; source_row=19417 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO agreed that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence of multiple authored articles published in scholarly journals to satisfy this criterion.
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 +
The AAO agreed that the petitioner submitted sufficient evidence of multiple authored articles published in scholarly journals to satisfy this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-08_01_B2203; source_row=19416 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The petitioner's own website stated that the two companies merged to form a new entity, contradicting the retraction. AAO found that the Florida corporate records showing two separate entities did not independently and objectively demonstrate that the petitioner continues to have a bona fide job opportunity for a business development manager.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner's own website stated that the two companies merged to form a new entity, contradicting the retraction. AAO found that the Florida corporate records showing two separate entities did not independently and objectively demonstrate that the petitioner continues to have a bona fide job opportunity for a business development manager.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2015-06-05_01_B5203; source_row=19407 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c