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 37613770

NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement

What the decision said

AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong, reserving it as unnecessary given the Petitioner's failure to satisfy the second prong, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.

Why this is useful

See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.

View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong, reserving it as unnecessary given the Petitioner's failure to satisfy the second prong, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_04_B5203; source_row=39363
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO did not disturb the Director's finding that the proposed endeavor satisfies the first prong.

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 did not disturb the Director's finding that the proposed endeavor satisfies the first prong.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_04_B5203; source_row=39361
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

Recognition for achievements and significant contributions - 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F)

Why AAO was not persuaded

Letters attesting to Petitioner's successful work and certificates of training establish his qualifications but not significant contributions to the aviation industry beyond his employer.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
Letters attesting to Petitioner's successful work and certificates of training establish his qualifications but not significant contributions to the aviation industry beyond his employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_10_B5203; source_row=39381
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

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

Why AAO was not persuaded

Petitioner's FAA and Brazilian ANAC licenses do not satisfy this criterion because he did not show the licensing agencies require licensees to hold bachelor's degrees, as required by the regulation's definition of profession.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
Petitioner's FAA and Brazilian ANAC licenses do not satisfy this criterion because he did not show the licensing agencies require licensees to hold bachelor's degrees, as required by the regulation's definition of profession.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_10_B5203; source_row=39379
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

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

Why AAO was not persuaded

Petitioner's experience as a transportation manager and operation technician is not 'in the occupation' of aircraft mechanic, as required by the plain regulatory language; analogous duties are insufficient.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
Petitioner's experience as a transportation manager and operation technician is not 'in the occupation' of aircraft mechanic, as required by the plain regulatory language; analogous duties are insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_10_B5203; source_row=39380
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO agreed with the Petitioner that the evidence was sufficient, citing USCIS Policy Manual guidance that peer reviewing for a scholarly journal qualifies as judging the work of others as long as proof that the review was actually completed is submitted, which the Petitioner provided through solicitation and thank-you emails.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
The AAO agreed with the Petitioner that the evidence was sufficient, citing USCIS Policy Manual guidance that peer reviewing for a scholarly journal qualifies as judging the work of others as long as proof that the review was actually completed is submitted, which the Petitioner provided through solicitation and thank-you emails.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_01_B2203; source_row=39336
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO found that while the expert letters were not wholly persuasive on their own and some ambiguity existed regarding citation percentile categories, the cumulative evidence — including over 1,100 citations, three articles cited 100+ times each, and percentile statistics — was sufficient on balance to meet the criterion.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
The AAO found that while the expert letters were not wholly persuasive on their own and some ambiguity existed regarding citation percentile categories, the cumulative evidence — including over 1,100 citations, three articles cited 100+ times each, and percentile statistics — was sufficient on balance to meet the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_01_B2203; source_row=39337
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Scholarly authorshipEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Scholarly authorship

authorship of scholarly articles

Why the evidence was persuasive

The AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner met the scholarly articles criterion; this criterion was not disputed on appeal.

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 +
The AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner met the scholarly articles criterion; this criterion was not disputed on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-25_01_B2203; source_row=39338
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · AwardsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Awards

lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards

Why AAO was not persuaded

The record lacked sufficient documentation on the selection process, number of entrants, and criteria for the fellowship award. Even if it received media attention, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that the fellowship itself is nationally or internationally recognized and awarded for excellence in the field.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The record lacked sufficient documentation on the selection process, number of entrants, and criteria for the fellowship award. Even if it received media attention, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that the fellowship itself is nationally or internationally recognized and awarded for excellence in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-24_01_B2203; source_row=39295
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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 organizations or establishments with distinguished reputation

Why AAO was not persuaded

The letter provided only a brief and general explanation of the Petitioner's duties and did not establish that he played a critical role for an organization as a whole, such as influencing its overall reputation or being responsible for its success. The letters primarily contained bare assertions of acclaim and vague claims without specific examples of critical contributions.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The letter provided only a brief and general explanation of the Petitioner's duties and did not establish that he played a critical role for an organization as a whole, such as influencing its overall reputation or being responsible for its success. The letters primarily contained bare assertions of acclaim and vague claims without specific examples of critical contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-24_01_B2203; source_row=39299
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment