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 23341–23350
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO finds the La Gazzetta dello Sport article is not about petitioner's work and lacks an author; Wikipedia evidence is not reliable to establish major media status; most articles lack identified authors.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds the La Gazzetta dello Sport article is not about petitioner's work and lacks an author; Wikipedia evidence is not reliable to establish major media status; most articles lack identified authors.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_03_B2203; source_row=14230 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO finds petitioner has not shown the regulatory criteria do not readily apply to his occupation; in fact he claimed to meet four of them. Comparable evidence is therefore unavailable.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds petitioner has not shown the regulatory criteria do not readily apply to his occupation; in fact he claimed to meet four of them. Comparable evidence is therefore unavailable.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_03_B2203; source_row=14235 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agrees with the director: petitioner provided no evidence that the organizations require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts. A position with an association is not membership, and translations were missing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agrees with the director: petitioner provided no evidence that the organizations require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts. A position with an association is not membership, and translations were missing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_03_B2203; source_row=14229 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
Although AAO acknowledges the 1993 first-place finish constitutes a single lesser award, the regulation requires plural prizes/awards. Photocopies are blurry, translations missing, and competition organizers' reputation is not established by independent evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Although AAO acknowledges the 1993 first-place finish constitutes a single lesser award, the regulation requires plural prizes/awards. Photocopies are blurry, translations missing, and competition organizers' reputation is not established by independent evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_03_B2203; source_row=14228 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO finds inconsistencies in the name of the 1993 competition across documents, insufficient evidence of the competition's prestige, and that supporting evidence was self-promotional from the issuing entity. The award does not approach the level of a Nobel Prize.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds inconsistencies in the name of the 1993 competition across documents, insufficient evidence of the competition's prestige, and that supporting evidence was self-promotional from the issuing entity. The award does not approach the level of a Nobel Prize.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_03_B2203; source_row=14227 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
national interest substantially greater than a U.S. worker
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the petitioner had not demonstrated his work had national impact, that the claimed independent citation was actually self-citation by the same research group, that counsel's assertions about future exponential citation growth do not substitute for evidence, and that the assertion of unavailability of U.S. workers is an argument for labor certification rather than a waiver.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the petitioner had not demonstrated his work had national impact, that the claimed independent citation was actually self-citation by the same research group, that counsel's assertions about future exponential citation growth do not substitute for evidence, and that the assertion of unavailability of U.S. workers is an argument for labor certification rather than a waiver.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_02_B5203; source_row=14226 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the antecedent step-1 requirement of qualifying evidence under at least three criteria.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the antecedent step-1 requirement of qualifying evidence under at least three criteria.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_09_B2203; source_row=14263 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the threshold requirement of evidence under at least three criteria.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the final merits determination because the petitioner failed to satisfy the threshold requirement of evidence under at least three criteria.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2012-04-23_08_B2203; source_row=14254 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c