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 20051–20060
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot established
Case facts
Computer Science / AIMaster’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · EB-2 baseline
Possession of advanced degree or foreign equivalent
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the credentials do not meet the advanced-degree requirement. AACRAO EDGE establishes the three-year B.Com. is comparable to three years of U.S. study and the master's is comparable to a U.S. bachelor's. The WES online tool was discounted as non-evaluative.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the credentials do not meet the advanced-degree requirement. AACRAO EDGE establishes the three-year B.Com. is comparable to three years of U.S. study and the master's is comparable to a U.S. bachelor's. The WES online tool was discounted as non-evaluative. The alternate path of bachelor's plus five years of experience failed due to insufficient and discrepancy-laden documentation and only 13 months of qualifying senior network engineer experience.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-12_01_B5203; source_row=18047 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Beneficiary meets minimum requirements of offered position
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO affirmed the director's finding, additionally noting that employment documents were deficient under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1), contained job title discrepancies versus the labor certification, and did not establish experience with the specific technical skills required. The beneficiary's total qualifying experience as a senior network engineer was only 13 months.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed the director's finding, additionally noting that employment documents were deficient under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1), contained job title discrepancies versus the labor certification, and did not establish experience with the specific technical skills required. The beneficiary's total qualifying experience as a senior network engineer was only 13 months.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-12_01_B5203; source_row=18048 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO raised this as a new ground beyond the director's decision. The petitioner's 2012 paystubs showed underpayment relative to the proffered wage, no 2013 wage evidence was submitted, and the record lacked required audited financial statements. Multiple co-pending I-140 petitions further required combined ability-to-pay analysis that the petitioner did not address.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO raised this as a new ground beyond the director's decision. The petitioner's 2012 paystubs showed underpayment relative to the proffered wage, no 2013 wage evidence was submitted, and the record lacked required audited financial statements. Multiple co-pending I-140 petitions further required combined ability-to-pay analysis that the petitioner did not address.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-12_01_B5203; source_row=18049 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
national in scope
Why AAO was not persuaded
The director found the petitioner's impact would be limited to the hospital where he practices, not national in scope. AAO repeatedly affirmed this finding, and the current motion failed to supply adequate evidence to the contrary — post-filing publications and grants could not be considered, and no documentary support for pre-filing activities was provided.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
The director found the petitioner's impact would be limited to the hospital where he practices, not national in scope. AAO repeatedly affirmed this finding, and the current motion failed to supply adequate evidence to the contrary — post-filing publications and grants could not be considered, and no documentary support for pre-filing activities was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-10_01_B5203; source_row=18045 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial intrinsic merit
What the decision said
The director found substantial intrinsic merit in the petitioner's work as a physician in medical oncology; AAO did not disturb this finding and did not separately analyze it in this motion.
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 director found substantial intrinsic merit in the petitioner's work as a physician in medical oncology; AAO did not disturb this finding and did not separately analyze it in this motion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-10_01_B5203; source_row=18044 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
national interest benefit substantially greater than U.S. worker
Why AAO was not persuaded
The director found the petitioner did not show he would benefit the national interest to a greater extent than an available U.S. worker with the same minimum qualifications. AAO affirmed this finding across multiple prior decisions and again in this motion, as no new sufficient evidence was submitted.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
The director found the petitioner did not show he would benefit the national interest to a greater extent than an available U.S. worker with the same minimum qualifications. AAO affirmed this finding across multiple prior decisions and again in this motion, as no new sufficient evidence was submitted.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-10_01_B5203; source_row=18046 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Chemistry / Chemical Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the totality of evidence demonstrates sustained national and international acclaim and that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
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 demonstrates sustained national and international acclaim and that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=18043 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Chemistry / Chemical Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found, upon review of the appeal and record, that the petitioner's evidence meets the original contributions criterion, reversing the director on this point.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found, upon review of the appeal and record, that the petitioner's evidence meets the original contributions criterion, reversing the director on this point.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2014-06-10_01_B2203; source_row=18041 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c