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 46614670

NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

OtherBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States

What the decision said

AAO declined to reach prong 3 because the failure to establish prong 1 was sufficient to determine the outcome of the appeal.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach prong 3 because the failure to establish prong 1 was sufficient to determine the outcome of the appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-28_06_B5203; source_row=37833
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences50 papers

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Final merits

final merits determination

What the decision said

AAO reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria. In the alternative, AAO reviewed the record in the aggregate and concluded it did not demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three criteria. In the alternative, AAO reviewed the record in the aggregate and concluded it did not demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-28_01_B2203; source_row=37819
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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 adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate national-level or regional impact, did not substantiate her business plan projections (including a plan to hire 178 employees by year five), and the record lacked evidence that the company was even formed at the time of filing. While the record indicates the endeavor has substantial merit, national importance was not established.

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 adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate national-level or regional impact, did not substantiate her business plan projections (including a plan to hire 178 employees by year five), and the record lacked evidence that the company was even formed at the time of filing. While the record indicates the endeavor has substantial merit, national importance was not established.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_04_B5203; source_row=37810
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot established

Case facts

Business / Management

Issue evaluated

NIW · EB-2 baseline

Advanced degree or equivalent qualification

Why AAO was not persuaded

The record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's titulo de bacharel program required four years of postsecondary study. The prior coursework at another institution was shown only as entrance exam preparation, not as transferred credit toward a four-year degree. The GEO credential evaluation failed to reconcile three and a half years of study with a four-year equivalency and contradicted its own cited EDGE authority.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's titulo de bacharel program required four years of postsecondary study. The prior coursework at another institution was shown only as entrance exam preparation, not as transferred credit toward a four-year degree. The GEO credential evaluation failed to reconcile three and a half years of study with a four-year equivalency and contradicted its own cited EDGE authority.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_02_B5203; source_row=37803
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Civil / Structural Engineering

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found the proposed endeavor has substantial merit (disagreeing with the Director on that sub-point) but agreed national importance was not established. The Petitioner provided only general notions of national impact and failed to show how his specific business serving regional clients would have broader national implications. Business plan projections lacked sufficient detail and explanation.

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 the proposed endeavor has substantial merit (disagreeing with the Director on that sub-point) but agreed national importance was not established. The Petitioner provided only general notions of national impact and failed to show how his specific business serving regional clients would have broader national implications. Business plan projections lacked sufficient detail and explanation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_03_B5203; source_row=37807
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

While the evidence may be insufficient to demonstrate national importance, the Director's analysis was largely conclusory, misidentified the Petitioner's proposed endeavor as IT consulting rather than aviation, and failed to address the Petitioner's arguments about federal initiatives, STEM advancement, and broader aviation implications that the Director had itself instructed the Petitioner to address in the RFE.

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 +
While the evidence may be insufficient to demonstrate national importance, the Director's analysis was largely conclusory, misidentified the Petitioner's proposed endeavor as IT consulting rather than aviation, and failed to address the Petitioner's arguments about federal initiatives, STEM advancement, and broader aviation implications that the Director had itself instructed the Petitioner to address in the RFE.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_05_B5203; source_row=37813
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

What the decision said

AAO did not independently analyze this prong, as remand was ordered on other grounds; the Director's finding in the Petitioner's favor was not contested.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO did not independently analyze this prong, as remand was ordered on other grounds; the Director's finding in the Petitioner's favor was not contested.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_05_B5203; source_row=37814
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Director's third-prong analysis was conclusory and did not sufficiently identify or discuss the evidence weighed or meaningfully address the Petitioner's specific claims, denying the Petitioner a reasonable opportunity to respond on appeal.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The Director's third-prong analysis was conclusory and did not sufficiently identify or discuss the evidence weighed or meaningfully address the Petitioner's specific claims, denying the Petitioner a reasonable opportunity to respond on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_05_B5203; source_row=37815
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well-positioned to advance the endeavor

What the decision said

AAO explicitly declined to reach the second prong because the dispositive finding on the first prong (national importance) was sufficient to dismiss the appeal.

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 declined to reach the second prong because the dispositive finding on the first prong (national importance) was sufficient to dismiss the appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_04_B5203; source_row=37811
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive job offer requirement

What the decision said

AAO explicitly declined to reach the third prong because the dispositive finding on the first prong was sufficient to dismiss the appeal.

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 declined to reach the third prong because the dispositive finding on the first prong was sufficient to dismiss the appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-05-24_04_B5203; source_row=37812
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
Back to assessment