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 22811–22820
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner did not establish the proper USD value of his Philippine Peso salary using a contemporaneous exchange rate. The salary comparison evidence was outdated (2007) and showed average CEO salary in the Philippines was actually higher than the petitioner's earnings. Even if the evidence showed above-average salary, that is insufficient to demonstrate a high salary under the regulation.
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 establish the proper USD value of his Philippine Peso salary using a contemporaneous exchange rate. The salary comparison evidence was outdated (2007) and showed average CEO salary in the Philippines was actually higher than the petitioner's earnings. Even if the evidence showed above-average salary, that is insufficient to demonstrate a high salary under the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_02_B2203; source_row=14854 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner failed to show that any of the five companies he presided over had a distinguished reputation, as conducting business successfully does not establish distinguished reputation. Additionally, the petitioner's role with the rotary club was insufficiently documented, and the criterion requires qualifying roles for organizations in the plural.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner failed to show that any of the five companies he presided over had a distinguished reputation, as conducting business successfully does not establish distinguished reputation. Additionally, the petitioner's role with the rotary club was insufficiently documented, and the criterion requires qualifying roles for organizations in the plural.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_02_B2203; source_row=14853 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The petitioner failed to provide membership requirements or bylaws showing the organization requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts; the membership certificate was unsigned; being a board member of a rotary club does not equate to membership in an association; and the criterion requires membership in associations (plural), not just one.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner failed to provide membership requirements or bylaws showing the organization requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts; the membership certificate was unsigned; being a board member of a rotary club does not equate to membership in an association; and the criterion requires membership in associations (plural), not just one.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_02_B2203; source_row=14850 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Prior counsel failed to submit the required statement about whether the AAO decision was or had been the subject of judicial proceedings, a deficiency that had already been flagged in the prior AAO decision.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Prior counsel failed to submit the required statement about whether the AAO decision was or had been the subject of judicial proceedings, a deficiency that had already been flagged in the prior AAO decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_03_B2203; source_row=14856 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1Aprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
procedural or other
New facts requirement for motion to reopen (8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2))
Why AAO was not persuaded
The submitted evidence was not 'new': much of it post-dated the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility at time of filing, counsel's unsupported assertions carried no evidentiary weight, recommendation letters from U.S.-based individuals were not explained as previously unavailable, and counsel failed to explain why three newly claimed criteria were never raised before.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The submitted evidence was not 'new': much of it post-dated the petition filing date and thus could not establish eligibility at time of filing, counsel's unsupported assertions carried no evidentiary weight, recommendation letters from U.S.-based individuals were not explained as previously unavailable, and counsel failed to explain why three newly claimed criteria were never raised before.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_03_B2203; source_row=14857 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO credited the letter confirming the petitioner served as one of four final judges in April 2010 and found this satisfied the judging criterion, even though it was raised for the first time on appeal.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The AAO credited the letter confirming the petitioner served as one of four final judges in April 2010 and found this satisfied the judging criterion, even though it was raised for the first time on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_01_B2203; source_row=14844 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO concurred with the director's finding that the petitioner met the display criterion, noting that the director had in fact already found this criterion satisfied.
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 finding that the petitioner met the display criterion, noting that the director had in fact already found this criterion satisfied.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_01_B2203; source_row=14846 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
What the decision said
Although counsel initially asserted this criterion when filing the petition, counsel did not continue the assertion in response to the NOID or on appeal, so the AAO concluded the issue was abandoned.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Although counsel initially asserted this criterion when filing the petition, counsel did not continue the assertion in response to the NOID or on appeal, so the AAO concluded the issue was abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_02_B2203; source_row=14852 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
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 provided no objective and independent evidence about the Woman magazine's reputation, readership, or geographic reach. Even if qualifying, the criterion requires publications in the plural. Evidence of other articles was unavailable and the petitioner's CV was insufficient to establish their publication.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner provided no objective and independent evidence about the Woman magazine's reputation, readership, or geographic reach. Even if qualifying, the criterion requires publications in the plural. Evidence of other articles was unavailable and the petitioner's CV was insufficient to establish their publication.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-07-11_02_B2203; source_row=14851 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c