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 22741–22750
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner's employment began after the filing date and cannot be considered. Even if considered, she failed to demonstrate that her role was leading or critical and that her employer had a distinguished reputation. Furthermore, the regulation requires leading or critical roles for multiple organizations (plural), but the petitioner only claimed eligibility based on one employer.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner's employment began after the filing date and cannot be considered. Even if considered, she failed to demonstrate that her role was leading or critical and that her employer had a distinguished reputation. Furthermore, the regulation requires leading or critical roles for multiple organizations (plural), but the petitioner only claimed eligibility based on one employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_03_B2203; source_row=14937 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
This criterion was first raised on appeal. The petitioner provided only an uncorroborated letter asserting approximately 1,000 downloads per month and contracts with various entities, but failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual box office receipts or record/CD/video sales as required by the plain language of the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
This criterion was first raised on appeal. The petitioner provided only an uncorroborated letter asserting approximately 1,000 downloads per month and contracts with various entities, but failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual box office receipts or record/CD/video sales as required by the plain language of the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_07_B2203; source_row=14956 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The director found that judging elementary school children is not judging others in the same or allied field. The AAO agreed, noting that counsel provided only unsupported assertions and no explanation of how judging children in a single charter school constitutes judging peers in the field of music.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The director found that judging elementary school children is not judging others in the same or allied field. The AAO agreed, noting that counsel provided only unsupported assertions and no explanation of how judging children in a single charter school constitutes judging peers in the field of music.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_07_B2203; source_row=14953 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO withdrew the director's finding because the submitted articles were not primarily about the petitioner or did not relate to his work in the field, lacked evidence of qualifying publication type, and post-petition-date evidence was excluded. The 2007 Minneapolis Public Schools report merely listed the petitioner among hundreds of partners and did not constitute published material about him.
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 submitted articles were not primarily about the petitioner or did not relate to his work in the field, lacked evidence of qualifying publication type, and post-petition-date evidence was excluded. The 2007 Minneapolis Public Schools report merely listed the petitioner among hundreds of partners and did not constitute published material about him.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_07_B2203; source_row=14952 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
In all relevant years (2007–2011), the sole proprietor's adjusted gross income minus expenses was insufficient to cover the proffered wage. Real property was not considered because it is a long-term, non-liquid asset. Bank account balances were not sustained at sufficient levels after the priority date.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
In all relevant years (2007–2011), the sole proprietor's adjusted gross income minus expenses was insufficient to cover the proffered wage. Real property was not considered because it is a long-term, non-liquid asset. Bank account balances were not sustained at sufficient levels after the priority date. Under the Sonegawa totality-of-circumstances analysis, the newly established business showed no significant growth, no outstanding business reputation, and gross receipts never exceeded the proffered wage.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_03_B5203; source_row=14940 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO affirmed the director's finding that the petitioner's evidence satisfies the plain language requirements for display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
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 that the petitioner's evidence satisfies the plain language requirements for display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_04_B2203; source_row=14944 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's appellate brief expressed only general disagreement and referred back to prior submissions without pointing to any specific error in the director's analysis; AAO treated this criterion as abandoned on appeal.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Counsel's appellate brief expressed only general disagreement and referred back to prior submissions without pointing to any specific error in the director's analysis; AAO treated this criterion as abandoned on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_04_B2203; source_row=14943 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Counsel's appellate brief expressed only general disagreement without pointing to specific error in the director's analysis; AAO treated this criterion as abandoned. Independently, evidence of a single film's commercial success does not satisfy the plural requirement of the regulation, and the box office gross was modest compared to major releases.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Counsel's appellate brief expressed only general disagreement without pointing to specific error in the director's analysis; AAO treated this criterion as abandoned. Independently, evidence of a single film's commercial success does not satisfy the plural requirement of the regulation, and the box office gross was modest compared to major releases.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_04_B2203; source_row=14945 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO held that the ESPN article was not new evidence because the petitioner did not explain why it could not have been presented previously, and AAO reaffirmed that the petitioner must demonstrate eligibility based on coaching achievements.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO held that the ESPN article was not new evidence because the petitioner did not explain why it could not have been presented previously, and AAO reaffirmed that the petitioner must demonstrate eligibility based on coaching achievements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_05_B2203; source_row=14947 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
What the decision said
Because counsel did not address this criterion in the appellate brief, the claim was abandoned and could not be raised within a motion to reopen and reconsider.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because counsel did not address this criterion in the appellate brief, the claim was abandoned and could not be raised within a motion to reopen and reconsider.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-17_05_B2203; source_row=14950 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c