Source-backed decision research

Explore how AAO evaluates evidence.

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.

Clear filters

10,847 decisions / 36,849 findings

Showing 22812290

EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Civil / Structural Engineering

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO affirmed that the Petitioner meets the judging criterion; no further analysis was provided in the decision text.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed that the Petitioner meets the judging criterion; no further analysis was provided in the decision text.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-12_04_B2203; source_row=41727
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific proposed endeavor beyond general aspirations and educational plans. Without identifying a concrete endeavor, the Petitioner could not satisfy either the substantial merit or national importance elements of prong one.

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 agreed that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific proposed endeavor beyond general aspirations and educational plans. Without identifying a concrete endeavor, the Petitioner could not satisfy either the substantial merit or national importance elements of prong one.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-08_01_B5203; source_row=41696
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

What the decision said

The Petitioner acknowledged on appeal that he has not satisfied the criterion relating to original contributions of major significance.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner acknowledged on appeal that he has not satisfied the criterion relating to original contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-08_01_B2203; source_row=41689
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Artistic displayNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Artistic display

display at artistic exhibitions or showcases

What the decision said

The Petitioner acknowledged on appeal that he has not satisfied the criterion relating to display 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 +
The Petitioner acknowledged on appeal that he has not satisfied the criterion relating to display at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-08_01_B2203; source_row=41690
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Published material

published material in professional or major media

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found MMA Fighting qualified as major media in the Petitioner's field based on its #2 ranking under Sports–Martial Arts on SimilarWeb. AAO rejected the Director's narrow reading that articles must relate specifically to a single martial art rather than MMA, and found SimilarWeb category rankings to be a justifiable readership measure for free online publications.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO found MMA Fighting qualified as major media in the Petitioner's field based on its #2 ranking under Sports–Martial Arts on SimilarWeb. AAO rejected the Director's narrow reading that articles must relate specifically to a single martial art rather than MMA, and found SimilarWeb category rankings to be a justifiable readership measure for free online publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-08_01_B2203; source_row=41687
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AotherEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

other

coming to the U.S. to continue work in area of extraordinary ability

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO found MMA incorporates the Petitioner's martial arts discipline and that he had always competed and coached in both; references to MMA therefore did not represent a departure from his previous experience or intended future work.

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO found MMA incorporates the Petitioner's martial arts discipline and that he had always competed and coached in both; references to MMA therefore did not represent a departure from his previous experience or intended future work.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-08_01_B2203; source_row=41695
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

Mechanical / Manufacturing Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's conclusion, noting that the Petitioner's appeal arguments failed to elaborate how the submitted evidence established eligibility and that the business plan, past work contracts, and industry reports did not establish national importance.

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 +
The AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's conclusion, noting that the Petitioner's appeal arguments failed to elaborate how the submitted evidence established eligibility and that the business plan, past work contracts, and industry reports did not establish national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-07_02_B5203; source_row=41682
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

Final merits determination (exceptional ability)

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found that the recommendation letters only confirmed the Petitioner performed her duties effectively without asserting her achievements exceeded normal field standards. The independent professor's letter did not show recognition beyond specific employers or adequately explain the claimed significance of her roles.

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 recommendation letters only confirmed the Petitioner performed her duties effectively without asserting her achievements exceeded normal field standards. The independent professor's letter did not show recognition beyond specific employers or adequately explain the claimed significance of her roles.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-07_01_B5203; source_row=41678
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed substantial merit was established but concluded the petitioner did not show the endeavor's prospective impact would extend beyond his company to affect the aviation field or U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. Staffing and revenue projections were unsupported, and claimed 'knock-on-effects' on the economy were not adequately substantiated.

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 agreed substantial merit was established but concluded the petitioner did not show the endeavor's prospective impact would extend beyond his company to affect the aviation field or U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. Staffing and revenue projections were unsupported, and claimed 'knock-on-effects' on the economy were not adequately substantiated.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-06_05_B5203; source_row=41671
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

Final merits determination – exceptional ability

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed the Petitioner did not meet the final merits standard. Training certificates showed completion of standard courses, AOPA membership did not require any expertise, and letters of support reflected benefits to individual employers rather than significant contributions to the aviation industry as a whole.…

Why this is useful

Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.

View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the Petitioner did not meet the final merits standard. Training certificates showed completion of standard courses, AOPA membership did not require any expertise, and letters of support reflected benefits to individual employers rather than significant contributions to the aviation industry as a whole. The Petitioner also failed to establish his ATP license represents significantly above-average expertise among pilots.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-11-06_02_B5203; source_row=41666
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment