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 2351–2360
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the industry broadly (small businesses, Latino-owned businesses) rather than the specific prospective impact of her own proposed endeavor. Her consulting work would impact only her prospective clients, not the industry more broadly.
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 found substantial merit but not national importance. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the industry broadly (small businesses, Latino-owned businesses) rather than the specific prospective impact of her own proposed endeavor. Her consulting work would impact only her prospective clients, not the industry more broadly.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_02_B5203; source_row=41546 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Speaking engagement materials are not scholarly articles. The Petitioner failed to show the Beneficiary authored scholarly articles (as defined by the Policy Manual) and also failed to show any such work was published in a professional or major trade publication or other major media.
Why this is useful
See how AAO evaluated whether the work qualified as scholarly authorship and what it showed in the full record.
View full reasoning +
Speaking engagement materials are not scholarly articles. The Petitioner failed to show the Beneficiary authored scholarly articles (as defined by the Policy Manual) and also failed to show any such work was published in a professional or major trade publication or other major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41540 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The letters did not elaborate on who, when, and what specific work was judged, and the Petitioner did not show how vetting job candidates constitutes serving as a judge of the work of others consistent with the regulatory criterion. The letters were vague, lacked specific details, and were unsupported by corroborating evidence such as candidate evaluation records.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
The letters did not elaborate on who, when, and what specific work was judged, and the Petitioner did not show how vetting job candidates constitutes serving as a judge of the work of others consistent with the regulatory criterion. The letters were vague, lacked specific details, and were unsupported by corroborating evidence such as candidate evaluation records.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41538 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary
Why AAO was not persuaded
The salary comparison data was for 'Web and Digital Interface Designers,' a different and lower job classification than the Beneficiary's position of 'Director of Product Design,' which is a managerial role with additional duties. The Petitioner was required to provide salary comparisons for other product design directors specifically.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The salary comparison data was for 'Web and Digital Interface Designers,' a different and lower job classification than the Beneficiary's position of 'Director of Product Design,' which is a managerial role with additional duties. The Petitioner was required to provide salary comparisons for other product design directors specifically.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41541 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
The recommendation letters did not demonstrate the originality of the Beneficiary's work or its major significance in the field beyond his employers, clients, or customers. No corroborating evidence showed the Beneficiary's work influenced the field at large or was viewed as major contributions throughout the field.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The recommendation letters did not demonstrate the originality of the Beneficiary's work or its major significance in the field beyond his employers, clients, or customers. No corroborating evidence showed the Beneficiary's work influenced the field at large or was viewed as major contributions throughout the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41539 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The submitted articles discussed apps the Beneficiary designed but were not about him personally as required by the criterion. The Petitioner also failed to provide comparative circulation or readership information to establish the publications as major trade publications or major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The submitted articles discussed apps the Beneficiary designed but were not about him personally as required by the criterion. The Petitioner also failed to provide comparative circulation or readership information to establish the publications as major trade publications or major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41537 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Being 'featured' by Apple does not constitute receipt of a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award. The letter claiming Bronze and Gold awards lacked sufficient corroborating evidence from the awarding organizations, and the significance of those awards in the field was not demonstrated. Unsupported assertions have no evidentiary value.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Being 'featured' by Apple does not constitute receipt of a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award. The letter claiming Bronze and Gold awards lacked sufficient corroborating evidence from the awarding organizations, and the significance of those awards in the field was not demonstrated. Unsupported assertions have no evidentiary value.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_01_B2203; source_row=41536 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found the proposed endeavor insufficiently defined to evaluate its substantial merit or national importance, concluding that how one pilot or flight instructor would address a national shortage or trigger substantial positive economic impacts had not been explained. Industry articles were of limited value because they focused on the importance of the field rather than the specific proposed endeavor.
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 found the proposed endeavor insufficiently defined to evaluate its substantial merit or national importance, concluding that how one pilot or flight instructor would address a national shortage or trigger substantial positive economic impacts had not been explained. Industry articles were of limited value because they focused on the importance of the field rather than the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_03_B5203; source_row=41549 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
Substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found substantial merit in the Petitioner's work but concluded it lacks national importance because the proposed activities—treating patients, working with privileged populations, setting employer protocols, and running health education campaigns—would impact only the Petitioner's patients and prospective employer, not the broader dental industry.…
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 found substantial merit in the Petitioner's work but concluded it lacks national importance because the proposed activities—treating patients, working with privileged populations, setting employer protocols, and running health education campaigns—would impact only the Petitioner's patients and prospective employer, not the broader dental industry. Industry-level evidence was deemed insufficient to establish the specific proposed endeavor's national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-31_08_B5203; source_row=41562 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c