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 3081–3090
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot established
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
NIW · EB-2 baseline
Advanced degree qualification
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's employer letters showed experience obtained before January 2019, the date he received his baccalaureate degree, and therefore did not demonstrate post-baccalaureate experience as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's employer letters showed experience obtained before January 2019, the date he received his baccalaureate degree, and therefore did not demonstrate post-baccalaureate experience as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_03_B5203; source_row=40334 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that Michelin Guide materials do not indicate that listed establishments or their owners become members of any association. For comparable evidence, the Petitioner did not explain how or even assert that the criterion does not readily apply to chefs.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that Michelin Guide materials do not indicate that listed establishments or their owners become members of any association. For comparable evidence, the Petitioner did not explain how or even assert that the criterion does not readily apply to chefs.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_02_B2203; source_row=40317 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that restaurant listing placements do not constitute prizes or awards received by the Petitioner. For comparable evidence, the Petitioner failed to establish the criterion does not readily apply to his occupation, and the record itself demonstrated the existence of culinary awards like the James Beard Awards.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that restaurant listing placements do not constitute prizes or awards received by the Petitioner. For comparable evidence, the Petitioner failed to establish the criterion does not readily apply to his occupation, and the record itself demonstrated the existence of culinary awards like the James Beard Awards.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_02_B2203; source_row=40316 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
AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but found no national importance, because the Petitioner conflated the importance of the broader industry with his specific proposed endeavor. His knowledge and skills arguments pertain to prong two, and he failed to show projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to his specific position.
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 but found no national importance, because the Petitioner conflated the importance of the broader industry with his specific proposed endeavor. His knowledge and skills arguments pertain to prong two, and he failed to show projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to his specific position.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_09_B5203; source_row=40369 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that serving as a mentor does not equate to participation as a judge of the work of others, and the evidence was insufficient to show the Petitioner served as a judge in the field. The Director's mischaracterization of the organization as the Petitioner's employer was a harmless error that did not prejudice the Petitioner.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that serving as a mentor does not equate to participation as a judge of the work of others, and the evidence was insufficient to show the Petitioner served as a judge in the field. The Director's mischaracterization of the organization as the Petitioner's employer was a harmless error that did not prejudice the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_05_B2203; source_row=40347 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the transcript showed only approximately 2.5 years of study (2008–2011), falling below the four-year threshold required for U.S. bachelor's degree equivalency under AACRAO EDGE. The academic evaluation's assertion of a four-year program was unexplained and contradicted by the transcript, so AAO discounted it. The Petitioner also failed to show five years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience in the specialty.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the transcript showed only approximately 2.5 years of study (2008–2011), falling below the four-year threshold required for U.S. bachelor's degree equivalency under AACRAO EDGE. The academic evaluation's assertion of a four-year program was unexplained and contradicted by the transcript, so AAO discounted it. The Petitioner also failed to show five years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience in the specialty.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_04_B5203; source_row=40343 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 substantial merit was shown but found national importance was not established. Unsupported projections of jobs and revenue, unsubstantiated claims about an economically depressed area, failure to show the educational model would impact the field beyond prospective students, and reliance on a general workforce shortage—which is addressed by the labor certification process—were all insufficient to demonstrate…
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 substantial merit was shown but found national importance was not established. Unsupported projections of jobs and revenue, unsubstantiated claims about an economically depressed area, failure to show the educational model would impact the field beyond prospective students, and reliance on a general workforce shortage—which is addressed by the labor certification process—were all insufficient to demonstrate national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_04_B5203; source_row=40344 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
AAO agreed that the proposed endeavor lacked national importance. The Petitioner's projections for 57 employees and economic benefits were unsupported, the area was not shown to be economically depressed, and the endeavor would not impact the industry more broadly or offer original innovations.
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 proposed endeavor lacked national importance. The Petitioner's projections for 57 employees and economic benefits were unsupported, the area was not shown to be economically depressed, and the endeavor would not impact the industry more broadly or offer original innovations.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_07_B5203; source_row=40362 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO partially disagreed with the Director, finding the Petitioner did establish substantial merit (withdrawing the Director's contrary finding), but agreed the Petitioner failed to establish national importance. The record lacked independent objective evidence showing her endeavor's prospective impact would reach substantial positive economic effects beyond her direct clients.…
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 partially disagreed with the Director, finding the Petitioner did establish substantial merit (withdrawing the Director's contrary finding), but agreed the Petitioner failed to establish national importance. The record lacked independent objective evidence showing her endeavor's prospective impact would reach substantial positive economic effects beyond her direct clients. Invocation of the accounting profession's general importance, shortages of accountants, and small business statistics without linking them to her specific endeavor was insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_06_B5203; source_row=40356 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO concluded the Petitioner showed substantial merit but failed to demonstrate that his specific endeavor of providing Business Development Director services in the Florida area had broader implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or substantial positive economic effects.
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 concluded the Petitioner showed substantial merit but failed to demonstrate that his specific endeavor of providing Business Development Director services in the Florida area had broader implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-08-27_01_B5203; source_row=40313 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c