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 4271–4280
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the Petitioner's contributions were limited to his employer and did not rise to major significance in the field as a whole. There was no evidence of widespread adoption by competitors or seminal impact on the broader e-commerce field. Contributions that merely impacted a single employer do not meet this criterion.
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's contributions were limited to his employer and did not rise to major significance in the field as a whole. There was no evidence of widespread adoption by competitors or seminal impact on the broader e-commerce field. Contributions that merely impacted a single employer do not meet this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_01_B2203; source_row=38434 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the evidence failed to demonstrate the publications qualified as major trade publications or major media, because the Petitioner relied on self-serving publisher materials and website rankings without showing the significance or relevance of those numbers relative to similar publications.
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 +
AAO found the evidence failed to demonstrate the publications qualified as major trade publications or major media, because the Petitioner relied on self-serving publisher materials and website rankings without showing the significance or relevance of those numbers relative to similar publications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_01_B2203; source_row=38435 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherManager
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that average salary statistics alone do not establish a high salary relative to others in the field, that national salary averages are inadequate when the petitioner's geographic area must be used for comparison, and that the Petitioner's salary falls below the 67th percentile for his occupation in his geographic region.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that average salary statistics alone do not establish a high salary relative to others in the field, that national salary averages are inadequate when the petitioner's geographic area must be used for comparison, and that the Petitioner's salary falls below the 67th percentile for his occupation in his geographic region. Non-salary remuneration comparisons also failed because they used national rather than local data and showed only above-average rather than significantly high remuneration.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_01_B2203; source_row=38437 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that neither the two articles (which do not mention the award) nor the letter (which reflects only internal employer recognition) demonstrated national or international recognition. AAO emphasized that national/international recognition must be evident from external sources beyond the issuing entity.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that neither the two articles (which do not mention the award) nor the letter (which reflects only internal employer recognition) demonstrated national or international recognition. AAO emphasized that national/international recognition must be evident from external sources beyond the issuing entity.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_01_B2203; source_row=38431 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or remuneration
Why AAO was not persuaded
The record lacked tax records or corroborating evidence of actual compensation received. The comparator salary data (2023) was not contemporaneous with the claimed compensation period (2013–2020), and the Petitioner did not demonstrate the validity of the 2023 salary data. A nonsynchronous comparison is insufficient to establish high remuneration relative to others in the field during the same period.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record lacked tax records or corroborating evidence of actual compensation received. The comparator salary data (2023) was not contemporaneous with the claimed compensation period (2013–2020), and the Petitioner did not demonstrate the validity of the 2023 salary data. A nonsynchronous comparison is insufficient to establish high remuneration relative to others in the field during the same period.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_02_B2203; source_row=38445 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Himalayan Times article only briefly mentions the Petitioner, and the translated Press Council Nepal list lacks identifiers confirming it was issued by that body and does not include specific circulation statistics. The two World of Women articles lacked identified authors, did not discuss the Petitioner's modeling work, and the publication was not shown to qualify as major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Himalayan Times article only briefly mentions the Petitioner, and the translated Press Council Nepal list lacks identifiers confirming it was issued by that body and does not include specific circulation statistics. The two World of Women articles lacked identified authors, did not discuss the Petitioner's modeling work, and the publication was not shown to qualify as major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_02_B2203; source_row=38442 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Lato Sensu certification was not a qualifying advanced degree; the employer letters did not cover five full years of progressive experience; and the letters lacked required regulatory elements (writer's name, address, title, specific duty descriptions).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Lato Sensu certification was not a qualifying advanced degree; the employer letters did not cover five full years of progressive experience; and the letters lacked required regulatory elements (writer's name, address, title, specific duty descriptions).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_05_B5203; source_row=38472 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 Petitioner failed to show national importance. Employment projections lacked corroborating evidence; STEM classification alone does not establish national importance; the Petitioner's personal skills arguments address prong two, not prong one; and providing professional services to individual clients does not demonstrate sufficiently broad implications for the field.
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 Petitioner failed to show national importance. Employment projections lacked corroborating evidence; STEM classification alone does not establish national importance; the Petitioner's personal skills arguments address prong two, not prong one; and providing professional services to individual clients does not demonstrate sufficiently broad implications for the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_05_B5203; source_row=38473 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO concluded the support letters address the Petitioner's qualifications rather than the prospective impact of the endeavor, the submitted articles do not address his specific endeavor, and the record does not show his work would extend beyond his clientele to impact the fields more broadly.
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 +
The AAO concluded the support letters address the Petitioner's qualifications rather than the prospective impact of the endeavor, the submitted articles do not address his specific endeavor, and the record does not show his work would extend beyond his clientele to impact the fields more broadly.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_04_B5203; source_row=38469 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 the Petitioner failed to show how consulting for individual food manufacturers would extend beyond his clientele to have broader national-level implications. Support letters were relevant to prong 2 but did not speak to national importance, and general industry articles did not address the Petitioner's 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 endeavor has substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to show how consulting for individual food manufacturers would extend beyond his clientele to have broader national-level implications. Support letters were relevant to prong 2 but did not speak to national importance, and general industry articles did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-26_09_B5203; source_row=38485 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c