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 5171–5180

EB-1AEB-1A · AwardsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Other

Issue evaluated

EB-1A · Awards

prizes or awards

What the decision said

AAO found the Director's determination conclusory, noting it did not specifically address the Petitioner's claims or evidence, and instructed the Director on remand to review the full record and issue a new determination based on the totality of evidence.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's determination conclusory, noting it did not specifically address the Petitioner's claims or evidence, and instructed the Director on remand to review the full record and issue a new determination based on the totality of evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_01_B2203; source_row=37005
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

NIW · Well positioned

well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

What the decision said

AAO reserved opinion on the second prong because the Petitioner's failure to meet the national importance requirement under prong 1 was dispositive, making it unnecessary to address prong 2.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved opinion on the second prong because the Petitioner's failure to meet the national importance requirement under prong 1 was dispositive, making it unnecessary to address prong 2.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_03_B5203; source_row=37021
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Medicine / Clinical

Issue evaluated

NIW · Waiver on balance

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

What the decision said

AAO reserved opinion on the third prong because the Petitioner's failure to meet the national importance requirement under prong 1 was dispositive.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO reserved opinion on the third prong because the Petitioner's failure to meet the national importance requirement under prong 1 was dispositive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_03_B5203; source_row=37022
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

procedural or other

Filing of disciplinary complaint or explanation for non-filing

Why AAO was not persuaded

The Petitioner acknowledged she did not file a disciplinary complaint but provided no explanation. The Eleventh Circuit requires substantial compliance with Lozada, and since the Petitioner's own allegations implicated ethical violations by prior counsel, she was required to explain the omission.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The Petitioner acknowledged she did not file a disciplinary complaint but provided no explanation. The Eleventh Circuit requires substantial compliance with Lozada, and since the Petitioner's own allegations implicated ethical violations by prior counsel, she was required to explain the omission.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_02_B5203; source_row=37018
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

procedural or other

Prejudice from prior counsel's alleged ineffective assistance

Why AAO was not persuaded

The denial was based on lack of national importance, not confusion about the nature of the proposed endeavor. The Petitioner did not show that describing her work as organizational psychology would have resulted in a finding of national importance. Furthermore, she signed the petition attesting its contents were true and correct, creating a presumption she approved the filing.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The denial was based on lack of national importance, not confusion about the nature of the proposed endeavor. The Petitioner did not show that describing her work as organizational psychology would have resulted in a finding of national importance. Furthermore, she signed the petition attesting its contents were true and correct, creating a presumption she approved the filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_02_B5203; source_row=37019
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWprocedural or otherNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social Sciences

Issue evaluated

procedural or other

Notice to prior counsel and opportunity to respond

Why AAO was not persuaded

The record lacked corroborating evidence that the Petitioner notified prior counsel of the ineffectiveness allegations. The submitted email criticized the filing's preparation but did not state intent to claim ineffective assistance or give prior counsel an opportunity to respond.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
The record lacked corroborating evidence that the Petitioner notified prior counsel of the ineffectiveness allegations. The submitted email criticized the filing's preparation but did not state intent to claim ineffective assistance or give prior counsel an opportunity to respond.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_02_B5203; source_row=37017
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

Official academic record showing degree relating to area of exceptional ability

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO implicitly accepted the bachelor's degree in printmaking/fine arts as satisfying criterion (A); the decision's denial turned on criterion (F) being unmet, leaving only two qualifying criteria established.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO implicitly accepted the bachelor's degree in printmaking/fine arts as satisfying criterion (A); the decision's denial turned on criterion (F) being unmet, leaving only two qualifying criteria established.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_04_B5203; source_row=37024
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWexceptional ability otherEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

exceptional ability other

License to practice the profession or certification for the profession

Why the evidence was persuasive

AAO implicitly accepted the teaching license as satisfying criterion (C); the denial turned on criterion (F) being unmet, leaving only two qualifying criteria established.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO implicitly accepted the teaching license as satisfying criterion (C); the denial turned on criterion (F) being unmet, leaving only two qualifying criteria established.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_04_B5203; source_row=37025
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context

Case facts

Social SciencesBachelor’s

Issue evaluated

NIW · EB-2 baseline

Advanced degree or equivalent (bachelor's + 5 years progressive experience)

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO found that testimonial letters and an uninformative 'Letter of Certificate' cannot substitute for notarial work experience certificates (NWECs), per U.S. Department of State guidance specific to China work experience claims. The Petitioner also failed to provide evidence of school mergers to justify primary evidence unavailability. The work permit lacked dates of tenure.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO found that testimonial letters and an uninformative 'Letter of Certificate' cannot substitute for notarial work experience certificates (NWECs), per U.S. Department of State guidance specific to China work experience claims. The Petitioner also failed to provide evidence of school mergers to justify primary evidence unavailability. The work permit lacked dates of tenure.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-16_04_B5203; source_row=37023
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 acclaim and top of field

Why AAO was not persuaded

AAO weighs the totality of the evidence and finds the Petitioner has not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim, nor that he is among the small percentage at the very top of the field. Evidence regarding a photo/caption in a published article, volunteer judging experience (including a single IBJJF event in 2019), and his role at a prestigious Brazilian academy is insufficient.

Why this is useful

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

View full reasoning +
AAO weighs the totality of the evidence and finds the Petitioner has not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim, nor that he is among the small percentage at the very top of the field. Evidence regarding a photo/caption in a published article, volunteer judging experience (including a single IBJJF event in 2019), and his role at a prestigious Brazilian academy is insufficient.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-15_01_B2203; source_row=36956
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Open source dataset ↗
← Back to assessment