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 · Leading / critical roleReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
What the decision said
AAO declined to address this criterion because the Petitioner had already satisfied the required minimum of three criteria, making consideration of an additional criterion unnecessary.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to address this criterion because the Petitioner had already satisfied the required minimum of three criteria, making consideration of an additional criterion unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_02_B2203; source_row=44976 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Both SCOPS and AAO found the Petitioner met this criterion through nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in footvolley.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Both SCOPS and AAO found the Petitioner met this criterion through nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in footvolley.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_02_B2203; source_row=44973 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why the evidence was persuasive
Both SCOPS and AAO found the Petitioner met this criterion by showing his U.S. coaching salary exceeds the average coaching salary in his geographical area.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Both SCOPS and AAO found the Petitioner met this criterion by showing his U.S. coaching salary exceeds the average coaching salary in his geographical area.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_02_B2203; source_row=44975 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO found SCOPS' third-prong analysis insufficient because it did not adequately discuss the evidence weighed in the balancing or address the Petitioner's specific claims, precluding meaningful appellate review.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO found SCOPS' third-prong analysis insufficient because it did not adequately discuss the evidence weighed in the balancing or address the Petitioner's specific claims, precluding meaningful appellate review.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_03_B5203; source_row=44983 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO did not resolve the prong but instructed SCOPS on remand to discuss the evidence and determine whether the record establishes the national importance of the proposed endeavor, noting some submissions were incomplete.
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 +
AAO did not resolve the prong but instructed SCOPS on remand to discuss the evidence and determine whether the record establishes the national importance of the proposed endeavor, noting some submissions were incomplete.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_03_B5203; source_row=44981 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
AAO faulted SCOPS for failing to sufficiently describe the evidence reviewed or meaningfully explain its shortcomings, particularly the support letters, and remanded without resolving the prong.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO faulted SCOPS for failing to sufficiently describe the evidence reviewed or meaningfully explain its shortcomings, particularly the support letters, and remanded without resolving the prong.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-12_03_B5203; source_row=44982 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agrees substantial merit is shown but finds the evidence demonstrates only impact to the Petitioner's clients, not broader implications for the metal fabrication industry. Importance of the field is not equivalent to importance of the specific endeavor, and the economic/job-creation claims are conclusory and unsupported.
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 +
AAO agrees substantial merit is shown but finds the evidence demonstrates only impact to the Petitioner's clients, not broader implications for the metal fabrication industry. Importance of the field is not equivalent to importance of the specific endeavor, and the economic/job-creation claims are conclusory and unsupported.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-11_01_B5203; source_row=44949 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the awards went to the Petitioner's employer, not to the Petitioner personally. The October 2024 policy guidance requires that the person be a named recipient of the award, not merely an employee of the winning entity. Colleague letters were unpersuasive because the colleagues were not privy to the awarding entities' decision-making.
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 awards went to the Petitioner's employer, not to the Petitioner personally. The October 2024 policy guidance requires that the person be a named recipient of the award, not merely an employee of the winning entity. Colleague letters were unpersuasive because the colleagues were not privy to the awarding entities' decision-making.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-11_01_B2203; source_row=44943 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c