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 7521–7530
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO disagreed with the Director's exclusion of the business plan but, considering it on de novo review, still found the proposed lone consultancy did not have national-level implications or substantial positive economic effects, with unsupported growth and revenue projections.
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 disagreed with the Director's exclusion of the business plan but, considering it on de novo review, still found the proposed lone consultancy did not have national-level implications or substantial positive economic effects, with unsupported growth and revenue projections.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-24_05_B5203; source_row=33331 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO declined to reach this issue because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the national interest waiver, making the EB-2 threshold question unnecessary to the outcome.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to reach this issue because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the national interest waiver, making the EB-2 threshold question unnecessary to the outcome.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-24_11_B5203; source_row=33357 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
published material about the alien in professional or major media
What the decision said
AAO explicitly reserved this criterion because the Petitioner met only one other criterion and could not reach the three required regardless of the outcome on this criterion.
Why this is useful
See how AAO evaluated whether the work qualified as scholarly authorship and what it showed in the full record.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly reserved this criterion because the Petitioner met only one other criterion and could not reach the three required regardless of the outcome on this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-24_01_B2203; source_row=33322 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
ten years full-time experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that only the Petitioner's work as an intern and junior human resources analyst (~76 months) was the same or similar to human resources specialist duties, which fell short of the required 120 months. Earlier roles as apprentice, receptionist, and administrative assistant did not correspond to human resources specialist duties.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that only the Petitioner's work as an intern and junior human resources analyst (~76 months) was the same or similar to human resources specialist duties, which fell short of the required 120 months. Earlier roles as apprentice, receptionist, and administrative assistant did not correspond to human resources specialist duties.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-24_08_B5203; source_row=33341 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the letters of recommendation contained complimentary statements about job performance but did not demonstrate achievements or contributions reflecting expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered.…
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 letters of recommendation contained complimentary statements about job performance but did not demonstrate achievements or contributions reflecting expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered. Certificates reflected professional education rather than exceptional achievement, a media quote was insufficiently explained, and photos of professional events did not demonstrate extraordinary achievements or contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-24_08_B5203; source_row=33345 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c