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 311–320
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Civil / Structural Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
While the Petitioner played an important role in a technology's development, she failed to establish she was the sole developer, and the technology itself was not shown to result in contributions of major significance rather than being one among a class of similar products.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
While the Petitioner played an important role in a technology's development, she failed to establish she was the sole developer, and the technology itself was not shown to result in contributions of major significance rather than being one among a class of similar products.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-04_03_B2203; source_row=44816 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherEngineer204 citations
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States
What the decision said
AAO declined to reach the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the first and second prongs, making analysis of the third prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish the first and second prongs, making analysis of the third prong unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-04_01_B5203; source_row=44812 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Both SCOPS and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria; no further individual criterion analysis was conducted on appeal.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Both SCOPS and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria; no further individual criterion analysis was conducted on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-04_01_B2203; source_row=44808 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesMaster’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed with SCOPS that the endeavor has substantial merit but withdrew SCOPS' finding on national importance. AAO found that the letters of support, cancer research documentation, and dissemination of results through journals and conferences sufficiently established 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 +
AAO agreed with SCOPS that the endeavor has substantial merit but withdrew SCOPS' finding on national importance. AAO found that the letters of support, cancer research documentation, and dissemination of results through journals and conferences sufficiently established national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-04_04_B5203; source_row=44821 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner failed to address the display criterion in response to the RFE, waiving the claim. AAO declined to entertain arguments on appeal that were not raised in the RFE response.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner failed to address the display criterion in response to the RFE, waiving the claim. AAO declined to entertain arguments on appeal that were not raised in the RFE response.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-04_03_B2203; source_row=44814 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the proposed endeavor has substantial merit but found the Petitioner did not establish national importance because evidence focused on the importance of the field and the Petitioner's past work rather than the prospective impact of 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 +
AAO agreed the proposed endeavor has substantial merit but found the Petitioner did not establish national importance because evidence focused on the importance of the field and the Petitioner's past work rather than the prospective impact of the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-03_02_B5203; source_row=44797 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agrees substantial merit is established but finds national importance unproven: industry-wide statistics do not show proportionate impact of the specific endeavor, claimed safety benefits and downstream impacts are speculative and uncorroborated, and the expanded geographic scope (Texas, North Carolina) raised on appeal is an impermissible material change unsupported by the record.
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 agrees substantial merit is established but finds national importance unproven: industry-wide statistics do not show proportionate impact of the specific endeavor, claimed safety benefits and downstream impacts are speculative and uncorroborated, and the expanded geographic scope (Texas, North Carolina) raised on appeal is an impermissible material change unsupported by the record.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-03_01_B5203; source_row=44794 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 the endeavor has substantial merit but found insufficient evidence of national importance. Geographic reach does not establish national importance under Dhanasar; the projected job creation and HUBZone location were insufficiently supported; and the importance of the broader legal services industry does not substitute for showing the specific endeavor's national-level 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 agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but found insufficient evidence of national importance. Geographic reach does not establish national importance under Dhanasar; the projected job creation and HUBZone location were insufficiently supported; and the importance of the broader legal services industry does not substitute for showing the specific endeavor's national-level impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-03_04_B5203; source_row=44804 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Electrical / Electronic EngineeringBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO disagreed with SCOPS' denial of national importance. The Petitioner's work addresses a publicly recognized need in aerospace, defense, and other fields; other researchers have cited his publications; and the record shows the benefit of the endeavor would not be limited to a particular employer.
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 disagreed with SCOPS' denial of national importance. The Petitioner's work addresses a publicly recognized need in aerospace, defense, and other fields; other researchers have cited his publications; and the record shows the benefit of the endeavor would not be limited to a particular employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-02-03_03_B5203; source_row=44800 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c