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 6291–6300
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated 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 reach the second prong, as the first prong was not met and the motions failed on procedural grounds.
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 reach the second prong, as the first prong was not met and the motions failed on procedural grounds.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_05_B5203; source_row=35274 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
FinancePhysician
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO affirmed the Director's finding that the Petitioner satisfied the leading or critical role criterion, though this single criterion was insufficient to meet the three-criterion threshold.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed the Director's finding that the Petitioner satisfied the leading or critical role criterion, though this single criterion was insufficient to meet the three-criterion threshold.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_01_B2203; source_row=35251 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
FinancePhysician
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO reserved the formal final merits determination under Bagamasbad but noted in dicta that the aggregate record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the very top of his field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved the formal final merits determination under Bagamasbad but noted in dicta that the aggregate record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the very top of his field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_01_B2203; source_row=35252 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO affirmed EB-2 eligibility on the advanced degree professional basis rather than exceptional ability, finding the foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's plus six years of qualifying experience satisfies the regulatory definition.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO affirmed EB-2 eligibility on the advanced degree professional basis rather than exceptional ability, finding the foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's plus six years of qualifying experience satisfies the regulatory definition.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_02_B5203; source_row=35263 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO affirmed that the Petitioner focused on the importance of the field rather than the specific endeavor, and the business plan's projections did not show substantial positive economic effects or impact beyond prospective clients.
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 affirmed that the Petitioner focused on the importance of the field rather than the specific endeavor, and the business plan's projections did not show substantial positive economic effects or impact beyond prospective clients.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_06_B5203; source_row=35276 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
ten years of full-time experience (employer letters)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found Petitioner did not explain why employer letters were unavailable, a prerequisite for accepting comparable evidence, and the submitted evidence lacked the required detail.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found Petitioner did not explain why employer letters were unavailable, a prerequisite for accepting comparable evidence, and the submitted evidence lacked the required detail.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2024-01-04_01_B5203; source_row=35255 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c