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.
membership in professional associations (criterion E)
Why AAO was not persuaded
Because dance studio owner/operator does not qualify as a 'profession' under the regulations, the Petitioner cannot satisfy the professional association membership criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because dance studio owner/operator does not qualify as a 'profession' under the regulations, the Petitioner cannot satisfy the professional association membership criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-09_09_B5203; source_row=38805 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination — degree of expertise significantly above ordinary
Why AAO was not persuaded
While the Petitioner submitted dance awards and recommendation letters, she did not provide evidence comparing her ability as a dance studio owner to that ordinarily encountered in the field, so she failed to show a degree of expertise significantly above ordinary.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
While the Petitioner submitted dance awards and recommendation letters, she did not provide evidence comparing her ability as a dance studio owner to that ordinarily encountered in the field, so she failed to show a degree of expertise significantly above ordinary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-09_09_B5203; source_row=38806 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The ballet certificate does not demonstrate that the issuing institution qualifies as a 'college, university, school or other institution of learning' or that the certificate is an 'official academic record.' The high school diploma is unrelated to the area of expertise.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The ballet certificate does not demonstrate that the issuing institution qualifies as a 'college, university, school or other institution of learning' or that the certificate is an 'official academic record.' The high school diploma is unrelated to the area of expertise.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-09_09_B5203; source_row=38803 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director that documentation from both employers failed to demonstrate progressive growth in responsibilities. Since the Petitioner graduated in April 2016, experience prior to that date is not post-baccalaureate, leaving only four and a half years with the primary employer.…
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 Director that documentation from both employers failed to demonstrate progressive growth in responsibilities. Since the Petitioner graduated in April 2016, experience prior to that date is not post-baccalaureate, leaving only four and a half years with the primary employer. The undisclosed second employer's letter also lacked detail on progression, and the unexplained omission of that employer created an unresolved material inconsistency.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-09_06_B5203; source_row=38793 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Biomedical / Life Sciences
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agrees the projected scale (9 employees, $720,000 in sales against a $329 billion market) does not show broad national impact, and the record lacks specificity showing how the consulting services would impact small/medium businesses or industries served at a national level.
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 projected scale (9 employees, $720,000 in sales against a $329 billion market) does not show broad national impact, and the record lacks specificity showing how the consulting services would impact small/medium businesses or industries served at a national level.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-09_08_B5203; source_row=38800 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the articles and reports did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed undertaking or demonstrate how his consulting services extend beyond his company and clients to impact the field or U.S. economy more broadly. Government initiatives recognizing small businesses did not indicate particular government interest in the Petitioner's specific activity.…
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 that the articles and reports did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed undertaking or demonstrate how his consulting services extend beyond his company and clients to impact the field or U.S. economy more broadly. Government initiatives recognizing small businesses did not indicate particular government interest in the Petitioner's specific activity. The shortage-of-consultants argument was insufficient, and the business plan projections lacked supporting documentation. Expert opinion letters were too general and did not explain how the Petitioner's specific endeavor rises to national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-08_01_B5203; source_row=38706 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
Final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's Chinese theater awards and articles about acting were insufficient to show he has risen to the very top of his field, and rejected the argument that the number of criteria met automatically determines the final merits outcome. The Petitioner's challenge to the Director's review standard was dismissed as conclusory for failure to identify specific errors.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's Chinese theater awards and articles about acting were insufficient to show he has risen to the very top of his field, and rejected the argument that the number of criteria met automatically determines the final merits outcome. The Petitioner's challenge to the Director's review standard was dismissed as conclusory for failure to identify specific errors.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-08_01_B2203; source_row=38704 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit (health) but concluded Petitioner conflated the importance of the profession with the impact of her specific endeavor, provided unsupported business projections, did not show operation in an economically depressed area or significant employment impact, and did not show how her local clinical work would broadly impact the field or STEM.
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 (health) but concluded Petitioner conflated the importance of the profession with the impact of her specific endeavor, provided unsupported business projections, did not show operation in an economically depressed area or significant employment impact, and did not show how her local clinical work would broadly impact the field or STEM.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-07-08_17_B5203; source_row=38760 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c