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.
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why the evidence was persuasive
A review of the record reflects that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence to minimally meet the plain language of this regulatory criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
A review of the record reflects that the petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence to minimally meet the plain language of this regulatory criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-10_01_B2203; source_row=15161 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
Original contributions of major significance
What the decision said
Counsel stated on appeal that the petitioner never claimed the original contributions criterion and that evidence was erroneously applied to it. Because counsel did not claim eligibility for this criterion on appeal, the AAO considers it abandoned.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Counsel stated on appeal that the petitioner never claimed the original contributions criterion and that evidence was erroneously applied to it. Because counsel did not claim eligibility for this criterion on appeal, the AAO considers it abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-10_01_B2203; source_row=15163 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO affirmed that the petitioner's nationally recognized competition awards in Junior, Amateur, and Rising Star levels meet the plain language requirements of criterion i.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO affirmed that the petitioner's nationally recognized competition awards in Junior, Amateur, and Rising Star levels meet the plain language requirements of criterion i.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-10_02_B2203; source_row=15168 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Successor-in-interest to labor certification employer
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner and the labor certification employer have different FEINs, indicating they are separate entities. The petitioner failed to satisfy all three conditions for a valid successor-in-interest relationship, specifically failing to show the job opportunity would remain the same.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner and the labor certification employer have different FEINs, indicating they are separate entities. The petitioner failed to satisfy all three conditions for a valid successor-in-interest relationship, specifically failing to show the job opportunity would remain the same.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-10_01_B5203; source_row=15167 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The ETA Form 9089 allows qualification via an H-1B equivalency evaluation under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h), which permits less than a bachelor's degree plus experience to substitute for a bachelor's degree. This means the position does not require an advanced degree or its equivalent, making it ineligible for EB-2 classification.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The ETA Form 9089 allows qualification via an H-1B equivalency evaluation under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h), which permits less than a bachelor's degree plus experience to substitute for a bachelor's degree. This means the position does not require an advanced degree or its equivalent, making it ineligible for EB-2 classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-10_01_B5203; source_row=15166 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of the alien's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO withdrew the director's finding, holding that criterion (vii) is limited to the visual arts, and that martial arts exhibitions are athletic rather than artistic in nature. The petitioner had not created tangible pieces of art on display at exhibitions or showcases.
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, holding that criterion (vii) is limited to the visual arts, and that martial arts exhibitions are athletic rather than artistic in nature. The petitioner had not created tangible pieces of art on display at exhibitions or showcases.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-09_02_B2203; source_row=15145 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Major awardNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Major award
one-time major internationally recognized award
Why AAO was not persuaded
The one-time achievement claim was raised for the first time on appeal. Under Matter of Soriano, a petitioner cannot raise a previously unclaimed eligibility criterion on appeal after being on notice of the filing requirements. The AAO declined to consider the claim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The one-time achievement claim was raised for the first time on appeal. Under Matter of Soriano, a petitioner cannot raise a previously unclaimed eligibility criterion on appeal after being on notice of the filing requirements. The AAO declined to consider the claim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-09_02_B2203; source_row=15139 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner did not contest the director's findings on appeal. The AAO affirmed, noting that vague, solicited letters from local colleagues that do not specifically identify contributions or their impact in the field are insufficient.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner did not contest the director's findings on appeal. The AAO affirmed, noting that vague, solicited letters from local colleagues that do not specifically identify contributions or their impact in the field are insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-09_02_B2203; source_row=15144 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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
The AAO concurred with the director's final merits determination. The festival awards were not comparable to the Olympics, judging experience was sparse, and the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement in the top percentage of the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO concurred with the director's final merits determination. The festival awards were not comparable to the Olympics, judging experience was sparse, and the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement in the top percentage of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-09_02_B2203; source_row=15147 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that expert letters lacked specificity about how the petitioner's work actually impacted the field, expert opinion without corroboration is insufficient, letters discussing future promise of impact do not satisfy the requirement that contributions already be of major significance, and a single published article appearing in multiple outlets does not constitute plural contributions.
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 expert letters lacked specificity about how the petitioner's work actually impacted the field, expert opinion without corroboration is insufficient, letters discussing future promise of impact do not satisfy the requirement that contributions already be of major significance, and a single published article appearing in multiple outlets does not constitute plural contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-08-09_01_B2203; source_row=15131 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c