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.
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other30 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner provided sufficient objective evidence that two specific newspapers (including digital versions) qualify as major media in UAE and Pakistan based on credible online circulation metrics and rankings, with 2018 articles focused solely on the Petitioner.
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 provided sufficient objective evidence that two specific newspapers (including digital versions) qualify as major media in UAE and Pakistan based on credible online circulation metrics and rankings, with 2018 articles focused solely on the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-13_03_B2203; source_row=45007 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner failed to show how her consulting strategies differ from or improve upon existing solutions in the U.S., did not provide evidence of specific economic impact or job creation, and her reliance on industry importance and government initiative alignment was insufficient. The expert letter was too general and focused on the trucking industry broadly rather than the Petitioner's specific endeavor.
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 Petitioner failed to show how her consulting strategies differ from or improve upon existing solutions in the U.S., did not provide evidence of specific economic impact or job creation, and her reliance on industry importance and government initiative alignment was insufficient. The expert letter was too general and focused on the trucking industry broadly rather than the Petitioner's specific endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-13_02_B5203; source_row=45002 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the criterion was met at step one but noted the Petitioner's argument about journal ranking is a step-one point, while journal quality is relevant to the final merits determination per USCIS Policy Manual.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the criterion was met at step one but noted the Petitioner's argument about journal ranking is a step-one point, while journal quality is relevant to the final merits determination per USCIS Policy Manual.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-13_01_B2203; source_row=44991 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c