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 21891–21900
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 declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to meet the threshold requirement of qualifying evidence under at least three evidentiary criteria.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to meet the threshold requirement of qualifying evidence under at least three evidentiary criteria.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-03-04_01_B2203; source_row=15987 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The petitioner did not contest the director's finding for this criterion on appeal and offered no additional arguments, so the AAO considered the issue abandoned. Additionally, the criterion applies to the performing arts, not the software publishing industry.
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 finding for this criterion on appeal and offered no additional arguments, so the AAO considered the issue abandoned. Additionally, the criterion applies to the performing arts, not the software publishing industry.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-03-04_01_B2203; source_row=15986 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
After reviewing all evidence including submissions on appeal and in response to an AAO-issued RFE, the AAO concluded it was more likely than not that the beneficiary held a foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in chemistry and at least five years of progressive work experience, meeting the labor certification requirements as of the priority date.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
After reviewing all evidence including submissions on appeal and in response to an AAO-issued RFE, the AAO concluded it was more likely than not that the beneficiary held a foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in chemistry and at least five years of progressive work experience, meeting the labor certification requirements as of the priority date.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-03-01_01_B5203; source_row=15981 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
exceptional ability - regulatory criteria and final merits
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the petitioner met at least three of the six regulatory criteria and that the totality of the evidence demonstrated a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the petitioner met at least three of the six regulatory criteria and that the totality of the evidence demonstrated a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-03-01_02_B5203; source_row=15982 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other2,011 papers
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
The AAO withdrew the director's finding because the television segments lacked required written documentation, many articles lacked identified authors, book reviews are about the alien's work rather than about the alien, and none of the publications were established as professional, major trade, or major media through objective independent evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO withdrew the director's finding because the television segments lacked required written documentation, many articles lacked identified authors, book reviews are about the alien's work rather than about the alien, and none of the publications were established as professional, major trade, or major media through objective independent evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=15967 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other2,011 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the reference letters contained vague, conclusory praise without specific examples of how the petitioner's work influenced or impacted the literary or television field at large, and the record lacked documentary evidence (e.g., citation impact, sales figures, independent critical recognition) demonstrating major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the reference letters contained vague, conclusory praise without specific examples of how the petitioner's work influenced or impacted the literary or television field at large, and the record lacked documentary evidence (e.g., citation impact, sales figures, independent critical recognition) demonstrating major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=15969 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO found that novels do not equate to scholarly articles, that editorial assistance is not authorship, and that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his contributions to the dramatic monologue volumes constituted 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 +
The AAO found that novels do not equate to scholarly articles, that editorial assistance is not authorship, and that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his contributions to the dramatic monologue volumes constituted authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=15970 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO withdrew the director's finding because the petitioner failed to submit primary evidence of the award, the media coverage was limited and did not demonstrate national or international recognition, the award was voted on by only 499 online voters, and only a single award was presented (the plural 'prizes or awards' requires more than one).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO withdrew the director's finding because the petitioner failed to submit primary evidence of the award, the media coverage was limited and did not demonstrate national or international recognition, the award was voted on by only 499 online voters, and only a single award was presented (the plural 'prizes or awards' requires more than one).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=15966 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other2,011 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination – sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the qualifying evidence under the judging criterion reflects limited participation inconsistent with someone at the very top of the field, and that the reference letters' praise, while noting accomplished referees, underscored how far the petitioner remains from the very top.
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 the qualifying evidence under the judging criterion reflects limited participation inconsistent with someone at the very top of the field, and that the reference letters' praise, while noting accomplished referees, underscored how far the petitioner remains from the very top.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_01_B2203; source_row=15971 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
single foreign equivalent degree to U.S. baccalaureate
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO agreed that a three-year foreign bachelor's degree is not a foreign equivalent degree, and that combining multiple lesser credentials does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). Neither evaluation concluded the beneficiary's bachelor's alone equates to a U.S. bachelor's.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO agreed that a three-year foreign bachelor's degree is not a foreign equivalent degree, and that combining multiple lesser credentials does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). Neither evaluation concluded the beneficiary's bachelor's alone equates to a U.S. bachelor's.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2013-02-28_04_B5203; source_row=15979 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c