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 45914600

NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / ManagementBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States

What the decision said

AAO does not reach prong 3 in light of the remand.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO does not reach prong 3 in light of the remand.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_01_B5203; source_row=37933
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / ManagementBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

What the decision said

The director found substantial merit but concluded the endeavor lacked national importance based on the wrong (withdrawn-petition) endeavor. AAO does not reach prong 1 substantively and remands for the director to reconsider on the correct record.

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The director found substantial merit but concluded the endeavor lacked national importance based on the wrong (withdrawn-petition) endeavor. AAO does not reach prong 1 substantively and remands for the director to reconsider on the correct record.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_01_B5203; source_row=37931
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Business / ManagementBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

What the decision said

AAO does not reach prong 2 because the underlying material-change determination was erroneous; the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO does not reach prong 2 because the underlying material-change determination was erroneous; the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_01_B5203; source_row=37932
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

meet at least three of six evidentiary criteria for exceptional ability

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found the Petitioner's appeal letters failed to tie any submitted evidence to any specific criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii), and the Petitioner also failed to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the Director's decision. No criterion was demonstrated met.

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 appeal letters failed to tie any submitted evidence to any specific criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii), and the Petitioner also failed to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the Director's decision. No criterion was demonstrated met.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_05_B5203; source_row=37952
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

What the decision said

AAO reserved this prong because the Petitioner did not establish the threshold EB-2 exceptional ability classification.

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 reserved this prong because the Petitioner did not establish the threshold EB-2 exceptional ability classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_05_B5203; source_row=37954
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

exceptional ability qualification

What the decision said

AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary to the disposition because the NIW prong-1 failure was dispositive.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this issue as unnecessary to the disposition because the NIW prong-1 failure was dispositive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-31_04_B5203; source_row=37948
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 found substantial merit established (potential for job creation and economic benefits to rural areas) but agreed with the Director that national importance was not demonstrated. The projected $254.7 million annual economic impact is a tiny fraction of the $640 million per day generated by foreign tourism to the U.S.…

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 substantial merit established (potential for job creation and economic benefits to rural areas) but agreed with the Director that national importance was not demonstrated. The projected $254.7 million annual economic impact is a tiny fraction of the $640 million per day generated by foreign tourism to the U.S. in 2019, and the Petitioner failed to show the projects would help economically depressed areas or that his consulting services would deserve credit for all projected economic benefits.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-30_07_B5203; source_row=37910
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot established

Case facts

FinanceBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · EB-2 baseline

five years progressive post-baccalaureate specialty experience as master's degree equivalent

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found the record did not support the Director's conclusion. The non-profit job verification letter listed ten responsibilities with no mention of accounting, and the Petitioner's clearly accounting-related experience totaled less than four years — insufficient to meet the five-year threshold for a master's degree equivalent.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO found the record did not support the Director's conclusion. The non-profit job verification letter listed ten responsibilities with no mention of accounting, and the Petitioner's clearly accounting-related experience totaled less than four years — insufficient to meet the five-year threshold for a master's degree equivalent.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-30_05_B5203; source_row=37899
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

FinanceBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found that the submitted evidence was general background on SMEs and did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Benefit to individual clients supports substantial merit (already conceded) but does not establish national importance. The Petitioner's speculation based on general background information did not meet the burden of showing broader implications and substantial positive economic effects.

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 submitted evidence was general background on SMEs and did not address the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Benefit to individual clients supports substantial merit (already conceded) but does not establish national importance. The Petitioner's speculation based on general background information did not meet the burden of showing broader implications and substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-30_05_B5203; source_row=37896
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · High remuneration

commanded a salary or other remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability

Why AAO was not persuaded

No evidence was submitted by the Petitioner to establish that they commanded a salary or other remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
No evidence was submitted by the Petitioner to establish that they commanded a salary or other remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-30_11_B5203; source_row=37925
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment