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.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 5241–5250
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 found that the Petitioner submitted conflicting assertions about pursuing the endeavor full-time versus completing his dissertation, failed to show receipt of any funding, and asserted prospective national impact in an implausibly broad array of fields without objective supporting 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 +
AAO found that the Petitioner submitted conflicting assertions about pursuing the endeavor full-time versus completing his dissertation, failed to show receipt of any funding, and asserted prospective national impact in an implausibly broad array of fields without objective supporting evidence. The support letters lacked substantiation for their far-reaching conclusions, and the Petitioner's comparison to Dhanasar was unavailing given his lower level of focus and documentation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-11_08_B5203; source_row=36935 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
ten years full-time experience in the occupation
Why AAO was not persuaded
Letters did not document whether experience was full- or part-time, contained dates that overlapped or were inconsistent with the Petitioner's resume and business plan, and the record did not establish self-employment.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Letters did not document whether experience was full- or part-time, contained dates that overlapped or were inconsistent with the Petitioner's resume and business plan, and the record did not establish self-employment.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-11_05_B5203; source_row=36921 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
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, finding that the Petitioner's evidence of skills, past achievements, and general data about the value of financial advisers does not demonstrate that his specific endeavor would broadly impact the economy at a regional or national level.…
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, finding that the Petitioner's evidence of skills, past achievements, and general data about the value of financial advisers does not demonstrate that his specific endeavor would broadly impact the economy at a regional or national level. Evidence of personal qualifications is relevant to the second prong, not the first, and the Petitioner failed to show that his endeavor's impact would extend beyond his specific clients or employers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-11_04_B5203; source_row=36918 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO reserved the final merits determination because the step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in aggregate that the record does not show the required acclaim.
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 step-1 threshold was not met, but noted in aggregate that the record does not show the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-04-11_01_B2203; source_row=36910 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c