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 7211–7220
NIWNIW · EB-2 baselineNot established
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
NIW · EB-2 baseline
advanced degree or equivalent qualification
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the university admissions role was not in the Petitioner's specialty, that simultaneous employment letters did not establish full-time status, that some experience predated her baccalaureate, that her graduate certificate was not an advanced degree, and that enrollment in a master's program could not establish eligibility at time of filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the university admissions role was not in the Petitioner's specialty, that simultaneous employment letters did not establish full-time status, that some experience predated her baccalaureate, that her graduate certificate was not an advanced degree, and that enrollment in a master's program could not establish eligibility at time of filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33825 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural Engineering
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed with the Director that the submitted articles and reports addressed renewable energy generally, not the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, and that the business plan lacked information about business activities, employment of U.S. workers, or other evidence of national importance. AAO also found that the Petitioner's appeal arguments did not overcome these deficiencies.
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 the submitted articles and reports addressed renewable energy generally, not the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, and that the business plan lacked information about business activities, employment of U.S. workers, or other evidence of national importance. AAO also found that the Petitioner's appeal arguments did not overcome these deficiencies.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_11_B5203; source_row=33841 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis, finding the Petitioner's appeal repeated the same arguments from his RFE response without new evidence. The recommendation letters focused on the Petitioner's work ethic and past experiences rather than national importance. Industry-wide reports were relevant to substantial merit, not 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 adopted and affirmed the Director's analysis, finding the Petitioner's appeal repeated the same arguments from his RFE response without new evidence. The recommendation letters focused on the Petitioner's work ethic and past experiences rather than national importance. Industry-wide reports were relevant to substantial merit, not national importance of the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_13_B5203; source_row=33847 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO agreed that the Petitioner failed to show national importance. Although helping U.S. businesses enter new markets and supporting the sustainability mobility sector are meritorious, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his specific endeavor would have national implications.…
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 +
The AAO agreed that the Petitioner failed to show national importance. Although helping U.S. businesses enter new markets and supporting the sustainability mobility sector are meritorious, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his specific endeavor would have national implications. Projected revenues and employment levels were not shown to be nationally significant, and the claimed indirect-job creation conflicted with expert evidence submitted by the Petitioner himself.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_01_B5203; source_row=33800 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that while the Petitioner participated in research projects and co-authored articles, the record did not demonstrate the significance of her role, the impact of her research on the field, evidence of citations by independent researchers, or a record of success showing she is well-positioned. The expert opinion was given little weight because it did not sufficiently detail the basis for its conclusions.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that while the Petitioner participated in research projects and co-authored articles, the record did not demonstrate the significance of her role, the impact of her research on the field, evidence of citations by independent researchers, or a record of success showing she is well-positioned. The expert opinion was given little weight because it did not sufficiently detail the basis for its conclusions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_14_B5203; source_row=33851 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner provided multiple inconsistent descriptions of her proposed endeavor (working as a dentist, as a dental practice CEO, and as a consultant to U.S. entities/clinics), and despite an RFE, failed to clarify.…
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 provided multiple inconsistent descriptions of her proposed endeavor (working as a dentist, as a dental practice CEO, and as a consultant to U.S. entities/clinics), and despite an RFE, failed to clarify. Even construing the endeavor as operating a dental practice, the Petitioner did not show that its prospective impact rises to national importance — the practice would not broadly impact the dental field, she did not demonstrate substantial economic effects, and her growth projections lacked objective support.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_10_B5203; source_row=33838 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural EngineeringEngineer
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the Petitioner failed prong 2, finding he did not corroborate claimed Colombian business ownership and that Australian tax documents and US entry contradicted his claims. Expert opinions relying on uncorroborated assertions were given less weight, and post-filing client relationships could not establish eligibility.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the Petitioner failed prong 2, finding he did not corroborate claimed Colombian business ownership and that Australian tax documents and US entry contradicted his claims. Expert opinions relying on uncorroborated assertions were given less weight, and post-filing client relationships could not establish eligibility.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_09_B5203; source_row=33836 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural EngineeringEngineer
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but disagreed on national importance, finding the evidence did not show broader impact beyond his business and clients. Expert opinions and industry reports failed to tie the specific endeavor to national-level prospective impact.
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 the endeavor has substantial merit but disagreed on national importance, finding the evidence did not show broader impact beyond his business and clients. Expert opinions and industry reports failed to tie the specific endeavor to national-level prospective impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_09_B5203; source_row=33835 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 the endeavor lacks national importance, finding the Petitioner's focus on his importance to his employer and its clients misplaced under Dhanasar, and noting his zero-sum supply-chain framing undermined claims of substantial positive economic effects. AAO expressly reserved the substantial merit aspect of prong one, which the Director also had not addressed.
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 the endeavor lacks national importance, finding the Petitioner's focus on his importance to his employer and its clients misplaced under Dhanasar, and noting his zero-sum supply-chain framing undermined claims of substantial positive economic effects. AAO expressly reserved the substantial merit aspect of prong one, which the Director also had not addressed.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_12_B5203; source_row=33844 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the HR consulting industry and his personal achievements rather than the national importance of his 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 the Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of the HR consulting industry and his personal achievements rather than the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor. The business plan projections of 30 jobs and tax revenue were insufficient to demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at the national level, and the expert letter similarly focused on industry importance rather than the specific endeavor's national implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_03_B5203; source_row=33811 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c