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 5011–5020

NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

ten years experience

ten years of full-time experience

Why AAO was not persuaded

The certificate from the Petitioner's former employer lacked sufficient details about his job duties to determine whether his experience was in the occupation being sought, and did not indicate whether his work was full-time as required by the criterion.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The certificate from the Petitioner's former employer lacked sufficient details about his job duties to determine whether his experience was in the occupation being sought, and did not indicate whether his work was full-time as required by the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-29_07_B5203; source_row=37302
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWacademic recordNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

academic record

official academic record

Why AAO was not persuaded

The certified translations submitted by the Petitioner were for an unrelated document, not the diplomas. Even if proper translations had been submitted, the diplomas would still be insufficient because the record does not show that any of the three diplomas are from an institution of learning or relate to the Petitioner's area of exceptional ability as a security management specialist.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The certified translations submitted by the Petitioner were for an unrelated document, not the diplomas. Even if proper translations had been submitted, the diplomas would still be insufficient because the record does not show that any of the three diplomas are from an institution of learning or relate to the Petitioner's area of exceptional ability as a security management specialist.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-29_07_B5203; source_row=37301
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner failed to maintain a sustained level of national or international acclaim after relocating to the United States. The record showed a seven-to-eight-year gap in competitive achievement, explanations about the pandemic were insufficient, and post-petition employment lacked documented accolades.

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 the Petitioner failed to maintain a sustained level of national or international acclaim after relocating to the United States. The record showed a seven-to-eight-year gap in competitive achievement, explanations about the pandemic were insufficient, and post-petition employment lacked documented accolades.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-29_01_B2203; source_row=37277
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 AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit, it found the Petitioner failed to show national importance because the evidence addressed the general importance of her field rather than the specific prospective impact of her 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 +
While AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit, it found the Petitioner failed to show national importance because the evidence addressed the general importance of her field rather than the specific prospective impact of her proposed endeavor. Her business plan projections lacked substantiation, her letters of support addressed personal qualifications, the expert opinion letter conflated the importance of the profession with the importance of the specific endeavor, and her arguments about worker shortages and federal alignment were unsupported by evidence of scale.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_06_B5203; source_row=37274
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 agrees substantial merit is shown but finds national importance is not. The proposed endeavor's outcomes would benefit only the Petitioner and her clients, not the broader field; her past achievements relate to prong two, and reference letters do not address 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 agrees substantial merit is shown but finds national importance is not. The proposed endeavor's outcomes would benefit only the Petitioner and her clients, not the broader field; her past achievements relate to prong two, and reference letters do not address broader implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_03_B5203; source_row=37265
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO agreed the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. The record lacked corroborating evidence that the endeavor's prospective impact—beyond benefitting the Petitioner's own customers—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 the Petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. The record lacked corroborating evidence that the endeavor's prospective impact—beyond benefitting the Petitioner's own customers—rises to national importance. The Petitioner's unsubstantiated revenue and job-creation projections did not distinguish his endeavor from other IT education entrepreneurs, and his personal qualifications and experience are material to the second prong, not the first.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_02_B5203; source_row=37260
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Original contributions

original contributions of major significance

Why AAO was not persuaded

Letters praised the Beneficiary's work but did not identify a specific original contribution of major significance to the field. Show house participation and magazine publication showed high regard but not field-wide impact.

Why this is useful

Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.

View full reasoning +
Letters praised the Beneficiary's work but did not identify a specific original contribution of major significance to the field. Show house participation and magazine publication showed high regard but not field-wide impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_01_B2203; source_row=37252
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · JudgingNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Judging

judging the work of others

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found the evidence of the Beneficiary's website pages was incomplete and failed to show that formal judging does not readily apply to residential interior designers. Even assuming inapplicability, the Beneficiary's promotional and advocacy activity at trade shows was not comparable to judging the work of others in the field.

Why this is useful

See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.

View full reasoning +
AAO found the evidence of the Beneficiary's website pages was incomplete and failed to show that formal judging does not readily apply to residential interior designers. Even assuming inapplicability, the Beneficiary's promotional and advocacy activity at trade shows was not comparable to judging the work of others in the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_01_B2203; source_row=37251
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
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

AAO found the commercially-sourced salary data unreliable due to wide disparity and lack of methodology information, and relied only on BLS data. Even accepting the bottom of the Beneficiary's salary range as above the BLS mean, this showed only a salary somewhat above average, not a high salary as required.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO found the commercially-sourced salary data unreliable due to wide disparity and lack of methodology information, and relied only on BLS data. Even accepting the bottom of the Beneficiary's salary range as above the BLS mean, this showed only a salary somewhat above average, not a high salary as required.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_01_B2203; source_row=37255
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established

Case facts

Computer Science / AI

Issue evaluated

NIW · National importance

substantial merit and national importance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to show national importance. The evidence relied on the general significance of cybersecurity rather than demonstrating the specific prospective national impact of her consultancy, and the business plan's financial projections lacked corroborating probative evidence.

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 agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to show national importance. The evidence relied on the general significance of cybersecurity rather than demonstrating the specific prospective national impact of her consultancy, and the business plan's financial projections lacked corroborating probative evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-26_05_B5203; source_row=37271
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
← Back to assessment