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 5981–5990
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 Petitioner's work experience at one employer occurred after the April 2021 filing date and thus could not be counted; other employer experience totaled under 8 years, and over 11 months was spent as an intern rather than full-time professional work, leaving the Petitioner short of the 10-year requirement.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's work experience at one employer occurred after the April 2021 filing date and thus could not be counted; other employer experience totaled under 8 years, and over 11 months was spent as an intern rather than full-time professional work, leaving the Petitioner short of the 10-year requirement.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-02-05_02_B5203; source_row=35733 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
The letters of recommendation described the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and general positive qualities but did not demonstrate recognition beyond his employers and clients or show work at a level indicative of achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The letters of recommendation described the Petitioner's character, work ethic, and general positive qualities but did not demonstrate recognition beyond his employers and clients or show work at a level indicative of achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-02-05_02_B5203; source_row=35735 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. The Petitioner failed to address the Director's specific findings on appeal — including regarding the material change issue and the misapplication of experience evidence to prong one — and merely repeated broad assertions without overcoming the basis for denial.
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 address the Director's specific findings on appeal — including regarding the material change issue and the misapplication of experience evidence to prong one — and merely repeated broad assertions without overcoming the basis for denial.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-02-05_04_B5203; source_row=35751 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c