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 22241–22250
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that in the aggregate the evidence showed early regional success as a child actress in Canada but no sustained national or international acclaim, and that the petitioner's more recent U.S. work produced no critical recognition, failing to establish her as one of 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 that in the aggregate the evidence showed early regional success as a child actress in Canada but no sustained national or international acclaim, and that the petitioner's more recent U.S. work produced no critical recognition, failing to establish her as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15566 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that criterion (vii) is limited to visual artists and does not apply to performing artists. Because the petitioner is an actress and not a visual artist who created tangible pieces of art displayed at exhibitions, she does not qualify.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the director's finding, concluding that criterion (vii) is limited to visual artists and does not apply to performing artists. Because the petitioner is an actress and not a visual artist who created tangible pieces of art displayed at exhibitions, she does not qualify.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15562 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that nominations do not qualify under the plain language of the regulation, which specifies only prizes or awards. The single award submitted (2003 Alberta Film and Television Award) lacked sufficient independent evidence to establish it is nationally or internationally recognized; counsel's assertions alone do not constitute evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that nominations do not qualify under the plain language of the regulation, which specifies only prizes or awards. The single award submitted (2003 Alberta Film and Television Award) lacked sufficient independent evidence to establish it is nationally or internationally recognized; counsel's assertions alone do not constitute evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15559 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the one-party contract was not probative evidence of an executed agreement to pay the proposed rate. Many financial documents did not show an hourly wage. Additionally, showing a salary above average is insufficient; the petitioner must show earnings at the very top of the field compared to similarly performing workers.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the one-party contract was not probative evidence of an executed agreement to pay the proposed rate. Many financial documents did not show an hourly wage. Additionally, showing a salary above average is insufficient; the petitioner must show earnings at the very top of the field compared to similarly performing workers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15564 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 other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
Most articles were about events or projects rather than about the petitioner. One article was not even in the record. The remaining articles appeared in publications with insufficient independent evidence of major-media status: one had a locally consistent circulation of 11,317, and information about another relied on an unreliable Wikipedia article and a document of unknown sourcing.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Most articles were about events or projects rather than about the petitioner. One article was not even in the record. The remaining articles appeared in publications with insufficient independent evidence of major-media status: one had a locally consistent circulation of 11,317, and information about another relied on an unreliable Wikipedia article and a document of unknown sourcing. Counsel's assertions about The Edmonton Journal's circulation do not constitute evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15561 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that neither the RFE response nor the appeal evidence included box office receipts or record/cassette/compact disk/video sales as required by the regulation. The RFE provided sufficient notice of required evidence, and the petitioner had multiple opportunities to submit it but failed to do so.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that neither the RFE response nor the appeal evidence included box office receipts or record/cassette/compact disk/video sales as required by the regulation. The RFE provided sufficient notice of required evidence, and the petitioner had multiple opportunities to submit it but failed to do so.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_05_B2203; source_row=15565 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPostdoctoral Researcher
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 petitioner's own publications belong under criterion (vi); citing articles are about the authors' own work, not the petitioner; news sites linking to the petitioner's work are not published material about the petitioner; topic review articles citing dozens of works are not about the petitioner; and support letters are not publications in major media.
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 publications belong under criterion (vi); citing articles are about the authors' own work, not the petitioner; news sites linking to the petitioner's work are not published material about the petitioner; topic review articles citing dozens of works are not about the petitioner; and support letters are not publications in major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_04_B2203; source_row=15552 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
Letters about the petitioner's role at M.D. Anderson did not sufficiently show his standing in the institutional hierarchy or how his role as a senior researcher within one department was critical to the entire organization. Moreover, the petitioner only submitted documentation of the distinguished reputation of M.D.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Letters about the petitioner's role at M.D. Anderson did not sufficiently show his standing in the institutional hierarchy or how his role as a senior researcher within one department was critical to the entire organization. Moreover, the petitioner only submitted documentation of the distinguished reputation of M.D. Anderson and not of the other organizations, while the regulation requires leading or critical roles for 'organizations' in the plural.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_04_B2203; source_row=15557 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPostdoctoral Researcher
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original scientific contributions of major significance in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
Support letters were largely conclusory, discussed potential future impact rather than already-achieved major significance, and compared the petitioner favorably only among young/early-career scientists rather than the field as a whole.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Support letters were largely conclusory, discussed potential future impact rather than already-achieved major significance, and compared the petitioner favorably only among young/early-career scientists rather than the field as a whole. The petitioner had only one moderately cited article, the most significant manuscript had not been published, and there was insufficient evidence that the petitioner's research had already been reproduced, confirmed, or applied by other experts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_04_B2203; source_row=15554 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
While the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's role was leading for both organizations, the petitioner failed to document the distinguished reputation of either the Korean National Taekwondo Demonstration team or the KCSNY Taekwondo Demonstration team.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
While the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's role was leading for both organizations, the petitioner failed to document the distinguished reputation of either the Korean National Taekwondo Demonstration team or the KCSNY Taekwondo Demonstration team. Furthermore, even if the Korean National team had a distinguished reputation, the regulation requires leading or critical roles for qualifying organizations in the plural.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-12-21_03_B2203; source_row=15546 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c