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 25212530

EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Leading / critical role

leading or critical role for distinguished organization

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner showed a leading role but failed to demonstrate distinguished reputation of his organization; the letters were conclusory, repeating regulatory language without elaboration or corroborating documentation. Additionally, a new claim based on a second organization was not considered because it was raised for the first time on appeal after the Petitioner had been given notice and opportunity to submit evidence.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner showed a leading role but failed to demonstrate distinguished reputation of his organization; the letters were conclusory, repeating regulatory language without elaboration or corroborating documentation. Additionally, a new claim based on a second organization was not considered because it was raised for the first time on appeal after the Petitioner had been given notice and opportunity to submit evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_01_B2203; source_row=41273
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

While one article was about the Petitioner and his work, he failed to establish that Energy Saving or abok.ru constitutes a professional or major trade publication or other major medium. The letter claiming professional journal status was insufficient, and no circulation significance data or website traffic data was provided.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
While one article was about the Petitioner and his work, he failed to establish that Energy Saving or abok.ru constitutes a professional or major trade publication or other major medium. The letter claiming professional journal status was insufficient, and no circulation significance data or website traffic data was provided.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_01_B2203; source_row=41271
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO agreed that substantial merit was shown but that national importance was not. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the broader field (physical therapy, eldercare, STEM) 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 agreed that substantial merit was shown but that national importance was not. The Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the broader field (physical therapy, eldercare, STEM) rather than the specific proposed endeavor. The business plan lacked corroboration and did not demonstrate that its revenue or employment projections would yield substantial positive economic effects at a regional or national level commensurate with national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_03_B5203; source_row=41286
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

membership in professional associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E))

Why AAO was not persuaded

The National Small Business Association membership was obtained after the RFE and therefore cannot be used to establish eligibility at time of filing; moreover, it is a small-business advocacy organization and does not limit membership to professionals. The original associations were not shown to be professional associations.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The National Small Business Association membership was obtained after the RFE and therefore cannot be used to establish eligibility at time of filing; moreover, it is a small-business advocacy organization and does not limit membership to professionals. The original associations were not shown to be professional associations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_01_B5203; source_row=41283
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

ten years of full-time experience (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B))

What the decision said

AAO did not separately analyze this criterion; it was identified as met at the RFE stage and not revisited.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO did not separately analyze this criterion; it was identified as met at the RFE stage and not revisited.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_01_B5203; source_row=41281
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))

Why AAO was not persuaded

The letters highlighted the Petitioner's business achievements and contributions to his customers' operations, but did not identify significant contributions to the industry or field more broadly beyond his customers.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The letters highlighted the Petitioner's business achievements and contributions to his customers' operations, but did not identify significant contributions to the industry or field more broadly beyond his customers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-09_01_B5203; source_row=41284
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AIMaster’s92 citations

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found the Petitioner's citations insufficient due to methodological concerns about comparing to a broader engineering field and the lack of qualitative analysis; his funding support was insufficient as he had not personally received research grants; his filed patent lacked evidence of approval or significance; his peer review activity was occasional and did not establish a record of success; and his varying future emplo…

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner's citations insufficient due to methodological concerns about comparing to a broader engineering field and the lack of qualitative analysis; his funding support was insufficient as he had not personally received research grants; his filed patent lacked evidence of approval or significance; his peer review activity was occasional and did not establish a record of success; and his varying future employment plans undermined his claim to be well positioned to advance his specific stated endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-08_02_B5203; source_row=41263
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

AAO found that the Petitioner demonstrated substantial merit but not national importance. Working as a single pilot or instructor would not produce broader implications for the aviation field, and citing the importance of the field or a nationwide pilot shortage does not confer national importance on an individual's 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 +
AAO found that the Petitioner demonstrated substantial merit but not national importance. Working as a single pilot or instructor would not produce broader implications for the aviation field, and citing the importance of the field or a nationwide pilot shortage does not confer national importance on an individual's specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-08_01_B5203; source_row=41259
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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 agreed the endeavor has substantial merit in areas of health and education, but found the Petitioner failed to establish national importance because the evidence showed only local or regional impact, the business plan projections lacked sufficient support, the RIMS analysis relied on unsubstantiated assumptions, and expert and support letters addressed only the general importance of the field rather than the specific en…

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 the endeavor has substantial merit in areas of health and education, but found the Petitioner failed to establish national importance because the evidence showed only local or regional impact, the business plan projections lacked sufficient support, the RIMS analysis relied on unsubstantiated assumptions, and expert and support letters addressed only the general importance of the field rather than the specific endeavor's broader implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-08_05_B5203; source_row=41268
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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 submitted media publications provided only generalized information about nutrition and did not address the Petitioner or her specific proposed endeavor. The Petitioner's assertions about economic development remained uncorroborated generalizations that did not establish the broader implications required for 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 submitted media publications provided only generalized information about nutrition and did not address the Petitioner or her specific proposed endeavor. The Petitioner's assertions about economic development remained uncorroborated generalizations that did not establish the broader implications required for national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-08_03_B5203; source_row=41265
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment