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 45314540

NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

FinanceManager

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States

What the decision said

AAO explicitly reserved judgment on the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first prong, making further analysis unnecessary.

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 reserved judgment on the third prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first prong, making further analysis unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-07_07_B5203; source_row=38057
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

FinanceManager

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

What the decision said

AAO explicitly reserved judgment on the second prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first prong, making further analysis unnecessary.

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly reserved judgment on the second prong because the Petitioner failed to establish national importance under the first prong, making further analysis unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-07_07_B5203; source_row=38056
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

NIW · EB-2 baseline

Advanced degree or equivalent qualification

Why the evidence was persuasive

With the WES evaluation and employer letters submitted on appeal, the record established both the foreign degree equivalency and the requisite five years of post-degree experience, satisfying the advanced-degree equivalency standard.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
With the WES evaluation and employer letters submitted on appeal, the record established both the foreign degree equivalency and the requisite five years of post-degree experience, satisfying the advanced-degree equivalency standard.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-07_05_B5203; source_row=38048
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

final merits determination — sustained national or international acclaim

What the decision said

AAO declined to conduct its own final merits determination and instead remanded because the Director's analysis was incomplete, failing to address the totality of the evidence submitted. AAO also noted that the final merits analysis must consider any potentially relevant evidence in the record, even if it does not satisfy any specific criterion.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct its own final merits determination and instead remanded because the Director's analysis was incomplete, failing to address the totality of the evidence submitted. AAO also noted that the final merits analysis must consider any potentially relevant evidence in the record, even if it does not satisfy any specific criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-07_01_B2203; source_row=38035
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · AwardsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Awards

lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards

What the decision said

AAO remanded without reaching this criterion; the remand instruction asks the Director to reconsider all claimed criteria in the final merits totality.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO remanded without reaching this criterion; the remand instruction asks the Director to reconsider all claimed criteria in the final merits totality.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-07_01_B2203; source_row=38028
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot established

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found that despite Director errors, the record lacked a record of success in related efforts, a detailed model or plan, progress toward the endeavor, or interest from prospective patients, employers, or organizations. The expert opinion letter did not address the relevant Dhanasar factors and was thus unpersuasive.

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO found that despite Director errors, the record lacked a record of success in related efforts, a detailed model or plan, progress toward the endeavor, or interest from prospective patients, employers, or organizations. The expert opinion letter did not address the relevant Dhanasar factors and was thus unpersuasive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-06_01_B5203; source_row=38014
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed that the Petitioner's evidence showed the importance of the logistics industry generally, but not the national importance of her specific endeavor. Her financial and employment projections were insufficiently explained and did not demonstrate operations on a scale rising to national importance. Expert and recommendation letters were conclusory and did not show broader implications.…

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 that the Petitioner's evidence showed the importance of the logistics industry generally, but not the national importance of her specific endeavor. Her financial and employment projections were insufficiently explained and did not demonstrate operations on a scale rising to national importance. Expert and recommendation letters were conclusory and did not show broader implications. The route optimization software's prospective national impact was also not sufficiently demonstrated.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-06_03_B5203; source_row=38019
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

OtherMaster’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed that the Petitioner's early-career publication record, citation counts with unquantified self-citations, a single recommendation letter lacking specificity on impact, and peer review activity together do not demonstrate that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor at the level required by Dhanasar.

Why this is useful

Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.

View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's early-career publication record, citation counts with unquantified self-citations, a single recommendation letter lacking specificity on impact, and peer review activity together do not demonstrate that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor at the level required by Dhanasar.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-06_04_B5203; source_row=38023
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

OtherMaster’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed with the Director's conclusion that national importance was not established, but disagreed that the Director's reasoning was correct — the Director applied an overly narrow economic-impact test. On de novo review, AAO found the Petitioner's evidence did not show broad implications in the field or that her specific endeavor's prospective impact rises to 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 the Director's conclusion that national importance was not established, but disagreed that the Director's reasoning was correct — the Director applied an overly narrow economic-impact test. On de novo review, AAO found the Petitioner's evidence did not show broad implications in the field or that her specific endeavor's prospective impact rises to national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-06_04_B5203; source_row=38022
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot established

Case facts

Business / ManagementManager

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

final merits determination

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO conducted an alternative final merits review and found the record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or a career of acclaimed work consistent with the extraordinary ability classification.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO conducted an alternative final merits review and found the record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or a career of acclaimed work consistent with the extraordinary ability classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-06-06_01_B2203; source_row=38012
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment