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 3071–3080
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherPhysician
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO accepted the Director's finding that this criterion was met, agreeing that the newspaper constitutes a form of major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO accepted the Director's finding that this criterion was met, agreeing that the newspaper constitutes a form of major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_03_B2203; source_row=40405 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
ten years of full-time experience (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B))
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found only one letter sufficiently established a period of employment; the self-authored letter and colleague letters did not meet the regulatory requirement of letters from current or former employers and lacked specificity on duties and dates.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found only one letter sufficiently established a period of employment; the self-authored letter and colleague letters did not meet the regulatory requirement of letters from current or former employers and lacked specificity on duties and dates.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_01_B5203; source_row=40393 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F))
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the letters uncorroborated by documentary evidence, the commendation medals did not name the Petitioner, the prize submission did not explain why he received it, military commendations described implementing strategies rather than field contributions, the investor forum invitation did not establish contributions, and the patent application was abandoned before filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the letters uncorroborated by documentary evidence, the commendation medals did not name the Petitioner, the prize submission did not explain why he received it, military commendations described implementing strategies rather than field contributions, the investor forum invitation did not establish contributions, and the patent application was abandoned before filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_01_B5203; source_row=40394 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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 found the evidence showed the importance of the field rather than the broader implications of the specific endeavor. The Petitioner's company does not offer its platform to the wider industry but limits benefits to direct partners, so the impact would not extend beyond the Petitioner and his partners. The company's five employees and unsubstantiated $56M valuation did not demonstrate national-level economic impact.
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 the evidence showed the importance of the field rather than the broader implications of the specific endeavor. The Petitioner's company does not offer its platform to the wider industry but limits benefits to direct partners, so the impact would not extend beyond the Petitioner and his partners. The company's five employees and unsubstantiated $56M valuation did not demonstrate national-level economic impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_01_B5203; source_row=40390 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Director improperly applied an academic-articles standard. The Petitioner's articles in publications such as Habr.com and Kommersant were written for learned persons in the field of business and technology and qualify as professional or major trade publications.
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 +
AAO found the Director improperly applied an academic-articles standard. The Petitioner's articles in publications such as Habr.com and Kommersant were written for learned persons in the field of business and technology and qualify as professional or major trade publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_02_B2203; source_row=40398 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the individual in professional or major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that the Petitioner overcame the Director's concerns by providing complete translations and explanations, and demonstrated that articles in outlets such as Komsomolskaya Pravda, Argumenty Nedeli, Forbes Kazakhstan, Esquire Kazakhstan, Cnews, and Tech Times qualify as major media discussing his work in cybersecurity.
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 Petitioner overcame the Director's concerns by providing complete translations and explanations, and demonstrated that articles in outlets such as Komsomolskaya Pravda, Argumenty Nedeli, Forbes Kazakhstan, Esquire Kazakhstan, Cnews, and Tech Times qualify as major media discussing his work in cybersecurity.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-28_02_B2203; source_row=40396 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Although the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit, he failed to demonstrate national importance. His claims of broad economic impact were unsupported, his personal expertise is a second-prong consideration, general industry-importance articles and shortage articles do not establish the specific endeavor's national importance, and letters of recommendation lacked probative detail on broader impact.
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 +
Although the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit, he failed to demonstrate national importance. His claims of broad economic impact were unsupported, his personal expertise is a second-prong consideration, general industry-importance articles and shortage articles do not establish the specific endeavor's national importance, and letters of recommendation lacked probative detail on broader impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_03_B5203; source_row=40336 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c