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.
The payscale.com report compared all hotel industry workers rather than hotel managers, used average rather than exceptional-ability-level salaries, covered a different city than where the Petitioner worked, and spa managers in the same industry earned higher average salaries than the Petitioner's highest earnings. The evidence was insufficient to show exceptional salary.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The payscale.com report compared all hotel industry workers rather than hotel managers, used average rather than exceptional-ability-level salaries, covered a different city than where the Petitioner worked, and spa managers in the same industry earned higher average salaries than the Petitioner's highest earnings. The evidence was insufficient to show exceptional salary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-10_05_B5203; source_row=34002 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions (criterion E)
What the decision said
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not meet the three-criterion minimum threshold regardless, making assessment of this criterion unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not meet the three-criterion minimum threshold regardless, making assessment of this criterion unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-10_05_B5203; source_row=34003 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 agreed with the Director that while the pilot shortage demonstrates substantial merit, the Petitioner failed to show how his individual employment would have a nationally significant impact on aviation or the U.S. economy. Reliance on industry-wide importance and professional qualifications does not establish the national importance of the specific 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 +
AAO agreed with the Director that while the pilot shortage demonstrates substantial merit, the Petitioner failed to show how his individual employment would have a nationally significant impact on aviation or the U.S. economy. Reliance on industry-wide importance and professional qualifications does not establish the national importance of the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-06_02_B5203; source_row=33976 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO reviewed the record in the aggregate as advisory guidance and found no sustained national or international acclaim, no demonstrated media attention spanning the relevant period, and no evidence of high remuneration or equity proceeds.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reviewed the record in the aggregate as advisory guidance and found no sustained national or international acclaim, no demonstrated media attention spanning the relevant period, and no evidence of high remuneration or equity proceeds.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-06_01_B2203; source_row=33975 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director's broad conclusion that the Petitioner had not met this criterion, though disagreeing on some specifics. The letters lacked corroboration, the documentary evidence did not link the Petitioner to a leading or critical role, and the RFE response raised an inapplicable due-process argument rather than addressing the evidentiary deficiency.
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's broad conclusion that the Petitioner had not met this criterion, though disagreeing on some specifics. The letters lacked corroboration, the documentary evidence did not link the Petitioner to a leading or critical role, and the RFE response raised an inapplicable due-process argument rather than addressing the evidentiary deficiency.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-06_01_B2203; source_row=33973 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The articles do not include a substantial discussion of the Petitioner's work in the field; they are about a new brand of e-cigarette. Additionally, the articles describe the Petitioner as a 'marketing director,' not as an entrepreneur, and therefore do not relate to his work in the field for which classification is sought.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The articles do not include a substantial discussion of the Petitioner's work in the field; they are about a new brand of e-cigarette. Additionally, the articles describe the Petitioner as a 'marketing director,' not as an entrepreneur, and therefore do not relate to his work in the field for which classification is sought.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-06_01_B2203; source_row=33971 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
OtherMaster’s3 papers
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director that the totality of the evidence did not show sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the very top of the field. AAO discussed each evidence category (awards, media, judging, recommendation letters, performances/ticket sales, earnings) and found none distinguished her at the upper echelon.
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 totality of the evidence did not show sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the very top of the field. AAO discussed each evidence category (awards, media, judging, recommendation letters, performances/ticket sales, earnings) and found none distinguished her at the upper echelon.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-05_02_B2203; source_row=33956 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the Director's 'self-manufactured' finding after the RFE response supplied proper titles, dates, authors, and certified translations, but still agreed the criterion was not met because the magazine articles were about fashion trends and marketing designer clothing—not about the Petitioner and her work in the field 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 +
AAO withdrew the Director's 'self-manufactured' finding after the RFE response supplied proper titles, dates, authors, and certified translations, but still agreed the criterion was not met because the magazine articles were about fashion trends and marketing designer clothing—not about the Petitioner and her work in the field as required by the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-10-05_01_B2203; source_row=33940 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c