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.
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 declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the step-1 threshold, but noted in advisory fashion that the record does not demonstrate the required acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the step-1 threshold, but noted in advisory fashion that the record does not demonstrate the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-02_01_B2203; source_row=41180 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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 that the Petitioner's evidence and arguments related to the general value of the legal profession and his personal qualifications rather than the national importance of his specific proposed undertaking. Industry reports about immigrant entrepreneurs did not demonstrate that his specific proposed endeavor as an attorney had national importance, and he did not show significant potential to employ U.S.…
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's evidence and arguments related to the general value of the legal profession and his personal qualifications rather than the national importance of his specific proposed undertaking. Industry reports about immigrant entrepreneurs did not demonstrate that his specific proposed endeavor as an attorney had national importance, and he did not show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or produce other substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_09_B5203; source_row=41172 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit (disagreeing with the Director on that sub-point), but agreed it lacks national importance. The Petitioner's evidence focused on his personal qualifications and the importance of his industry rather than the specific prospective impact of his 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 agreed the endeavor has substantial merit (disagreeing with the Director on that sub-point), but agreed it lacks national importance. The Petitioner's evidence focused on his personal qualifications and the importance of his industry rather than the specific prospective impact of his proposed endeavor. The record did not show that his proposed work as a senior engineer would have broader economic, societal, or industry-wide implications rising to national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_07_B5203; source_row=41166 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not identify any specific organization or point to evidence showing his roles were leading roles. His employment agreement indicated he reports to the Head Coach and Board of Directors, undermining a leading role claim. He also failed to show the organizations have a distinguished reputation.
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 identify any specific organization or point to evidence showing his roles were leading roles. His employment agreement indicated he reports to the Head Coach and Board of Directors, undermining a leading role claim. He also failed to show the organizations have a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41149 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner's field is not in the performing arts, and he presented no sales or box office receipts. The criterion is inapplicable to his occupation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's field is not in the performing arts, and he presented no sales or box office receipts. The criterion is inapplicable to his occupation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41151 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or significantly high remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not provide comparative evidence showing his salary is high relative to others in the field of swim coaching. A salary and tax return alone are insufficient without comparison evidence.
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 provide comparative evidence showing his salary is high relative to others in the field of swim coaching. A salary and tax return alone are insufficient without comparison evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41150 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not identify specific original contributions of major significance. The expert letters discussed competitive swimming achievements rather than original work with substantial influence on the field. The record lacked corroborating documentation showing 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 did not identify specific original contributions of major significance. The expert letters discussed competitive swimming achievements rather than original work with substantial influence on the field. The record lacked corroborating documentation showing contributions of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41148 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his swim team requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts, and the field for classification is coaching/instruction — not competitive swimming. The swim team was not shown to be a coaching association.
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 demonstrate that his swim team requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts, and the field for classification is coaching/instruction — not competitive swimming. The swim team was not shown to be a coaching association.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41146 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The articles related to competitive swimming accomplishments, not to coaching and instruction (the relevant field). The Petitioner also failed to establish that the publications rise to the level of major trade publications or other major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The articles related to competitive swimming accomplishments, not to coaching and instruction (the relevant field). The Petitioner also failed to establish that the publications rise to the level of major trade publications or other major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-10-01_02_B2203; source_row=41147 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c