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 31–40
EB-1AEB-1A · MembershipNot established
Case facts
FinanceManager2,024 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Membership
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
On appeal, the Petitioner did not contest SCOPS' determination on membership in most organizations; as to the board membership, AAO found the supporting letter lacked objective evidence of specific membership requirements and the petitioner did not explain how industrial engineering association membership demonstrates extraordinary ability in private equity and investment banking.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
On appeal, the Petitioner did not contest SCOPS' determination on membership in most organizations; as to the board membership, AAO found the supporting letter lacked objective evidence of specific membership requirements and the petitioner did not explain how industrial engineering association membership demonstrates extraordinary ability in private equity and investment banking.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45226 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while the Petitioner has skills, expertise, and some recognition, the totality of evidence does not reflect a career of acclaimed work at the very top of the field. His media coverage is limited and recent, his judging activities lack independent acclaim, his company lacks demonstrated distinguished reputation, his salary is below industry benchmarks for his role, and his recommendation letters make general s…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the Petitioner has skills, expertise, and some recognition, the totality of evidence does not reflect a career of acclaimed work at the very top of the field. His media coverage is limited and recent, his judging activities lack independent acclaim, his company lacks demonstrated distinguished reputation, his salary is below industry benchmarks for his role, and his recommendation letters make general statements without demonstrating wide recognition in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45232 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
FinanceManager2,024 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while the Petitioner holds a leading role, the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that his company has a distinguished reputation in the private equity industry based on assets under management or other objective evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the Petitioner holds a leading role, the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that his company has a distinguished reputation in the private equity industry based on assets under management or other objective evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45230 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
commanding a high salary or other significantly high remuneration in relation to others in the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner's $190,000 base salary was below the $250,000–$400,000 typical range for Principals/Directors in private equity, his comparison metrics were not appropriate, and the equity component was supported only by an unsigned, undated document without corroboration.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Petitioner's $190,000 base salary was below the $250,000–$400,000 typical range for Principals/Directors in private equity, his comparison metrics were not appropriate, and the equity component was supported only by an unsigned, undated document without corroboration.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45231 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agrees the endeavor has substantial merit but holds that evidence of the importance of AI/robotics generally does not establish national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor; the advisor letter and grant evidence relate to prong 2.
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 the endeavor has substantial merit but holds that evidence of the importance of AI/robotics generally does not establish national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor; the advisor letter and grant evidence relate to prong 2.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_02_B5203; source_row=45242 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases (comparable evidence)
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO agreed with the Petitioner that he meets the display criterion through comparable evidence, citing his presentation at an Entrepreneurship Through Acquisition Club Event.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed with the Petitioner that he meets the display criterion through comparable evidence, citing his presentation at an Entrepreneurship Through Acquisition Club Event.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45229 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
FinanceManager2,024 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the Petitioner met the published material criterion, citing for example an article about him in a newspaper shown to be 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 found the Petitioner met the published material criterion, citing for example an article about him in a newspaper shown to be a form of major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-26_01_B2203; source_row=45227 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
published material in professional/major trade publications or major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the entries in certain publications were promotional advertising, including entries with 'advertisement' headings or blog submissions used for self-promotion. The Singapore edition publication entry lacked persuasive evidence that it qualifies as major media, as the submitted Similarweb traffic data lacked context for meaningful comparison.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the entries in certain publications were promotional advertising, including entries with 'advertisement' headings or blog submissions used for self-promotion. The Singapore edition publication entry lacked persuasive evidence that it qualifies as major media, as the submitted Similarweb traffic data lacked context for meaningful comparison.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-25_01_B2203; source_row=45166 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Computer Science / AI892 citations
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the petitioner made original contributions but failed to show they were of major significance to the field writ large. Expert letters provided only general statements about the nature of contributions without establishing their broader impact; citation data was unreliable due to potential self-citations and lack of commentary context; and the MOU and NSF proposal did not establish major significance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the petitioner made original contributions but failed to show they were of major significance to the field writ large. Expert letters provided only general statements about the nature of contributions without establishing their broader impact; citation data was unreliable due to potential self-citations and lack of commentary context; and the MOU and NSF proposal did not establish major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-25_01_B2203; source_row=45168 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c