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 7221–7230
NIWNIW · National importanceNot established
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the proposed endeavor was not identified with specificity or consistency — the Petitioner described different endeavors (wood pellet consulting vs. import/export entrepreneurship) and incorporated a new, unexplained company. The expert letter was based on the importance of entrepreneurship generally rather than the Petitioner's specific proposed work, and the business plan projections lacked sufficient basis.…
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 proposed endeavor was not identified with specificity or consistency — the Petitioner described different endeavors (wood pellet consulting vs. import/export entrepreneurship) and incorporated a new, unexplained company. The expert letter was based on the importance of entrepreneurship generally rather than the Petitioner's specific proposed work, and the business plan projections lacked sufficient basis. AAO concluded the Petitioner had not shown her endeavor would impact the U.S. economy more broadly at the level of national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_02_B5203; source_row=33808 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 that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific, cognizable endeavor with national importance. The Petitioner's professional plan merely expressed an intent to 'offer expertise' and pursue positions in the aviation industry, which is a job search rather than a defined 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 that the Petitioner failed to identify a specific, cognizable endeavor with national importance. The Petitioner's professional plan merely expressed an intent to 'offer expertise' and pursue positions in the aviation industry, which is a job search rather than a defined endeavor. Claims about 'ripple effects' on the industry and economy were insufficient to show impact extending beyond customers and employers to the broader aviation field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_07_B5203; source_row=33822 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Director's prong-1 analysis fatally flawed: the conclusion that the Petitioner had 'no proposed endeavor' was internally contradictory (the Director had simultaneously found substantial merit) and contrary to the submitted evidence including a professional plan and expert opinion letter. AAO remanded for a proper analysis.
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 the Director's prong-1 analysis fatally flawed: the conclusion that the Petitioner had 'no proposed endeavor' was internally contradictory (the Director had simultaneously found substantial merit) and contrary to the submitted evidence including a professional plan and expert opinion letter. AAO remanded for a proper analysis.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_04_B5203; source_row=33814 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner's professional history only spanned seven years at the time of filing, and the evidence did not establish that her simultaneous employment was full-time.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's professional history only spanned seven years at the time of filing, and the evidence did not establish that her simultaneous employment was full-time.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33827 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Florida median wage comparison was not probative because the Petitioner worked as a financial intern in New York, and the intern pay was below that median. The expert's wage comparison used a non-location-specific national figure of questionable provenance, reducing its probative value. The Brazilian income was not compared to others in her field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Florida median wage comparison was not probative because the Petitioner worked as a financial intern in New York, and the intern pay was below that median. The expert's wage comparison used a non-location-specific national figure of questionable provenance, reducing its probative value. The Brazilian income was not compared to others in her field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33829 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The documentation for all three organizations failed to establish that they are professional associations as contemplated by regulation—none provided membership requirements showing that a professional degree is the minimum entry requirement.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The documentation for all three organizations failed to establish that they are professional associations as contemplated by regulation—none provided membership requirements showing that a professional degree is the minimum entry requirement.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33830 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
The article did not name any specific achievement or contribution, and the support letters showed internal impact on employers and teams but not broader contributions to the field of finance.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The article did not name any specific achievement or contribution, and the support letters showed internal impact on employers and teams but not broader contributions to the field of finance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33831 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 agreed that the Petitioner's evidence showed only internal impact on her employers and did not document nationally important impact. The brief's claims about DCF models and industry templates were unsubstantiated, and the Petitioner's argument about economic impact lacked quantification or documentation of broader effects.
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 that the Petitioner's evidence showed only internal impact on her employers and did not document nationally important impact. The brief's claims about DCF models and industry templates were unsubstantiated, and the Petitioner's argument about economic impact lacked quantification or documentation of broader effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-09-28_08_B5203; source_row=33832 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c