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.
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the Petitioner holds only associate membership in PSA, which requires meeting the 'basic principles of the pastel field' rather than outstanding achievements. Only PSA's honorary membership category requires 'outstanding or distinguished services,' and honorary membership is not available to associate members like the Petitioner.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO found that the Petitioner holds only associate membership in PSA, which requires meeting the 'basic principles of the pastel field' rather than outstanding achievements. Only PSA's honorary membership category requires 'outstanding or distinguished services,' and honorary membership is not available to associate members like the Petitioner.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-22_01_B2203; source_row=33292 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 has substantial merit (economic benefits and energy security) but found national importance not established because the record lacked corroborating evidence that savings passed through to clients, his new employer's scope and budget were smaller, and neither employer demonstrably used savings to create U.S. jobs or fund R&D.
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 (economic benefits and energy security) but found national importance not established because the record lacked corroborating evidence that savings passed through to clients, his new employer's scope and budget were smaller, and neither employer demonstrably used savings to create U.S. jobs or fund R&D.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-22_02_B5203; source_row=33302 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to conduct a full final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial threshold of three criteria, but noted in the aggregate that the record does not support sustained national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a full final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial threshold of three criteria, but noted in the aggregate that the record does not support sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-22_01_B2203; source_row=33301 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that the Petitioner's focus on prior work experience was misplaced for the first prong, and that the record failed to show national or global implications from operating a local management consulting startup. The projected average annual wage of $28,727 per worker did not demonstrate significant potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic 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 found that the Petitioner's focus on prior work experience was misplaced for the first prong, and that the record failed to show national or global implications from operating a local management consulting startup. The projected average annual wage of $28,727 per worker did not demonstrate significant potential to employ U.S. workers or produce substantial positive economic effects. AAO reserved opinion on the substantial merit sub-element.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-21_01_B5203; source_row=33288 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner in professional or major trade publications
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO noted that while the Director did not analyze one article about the Petitioner's receipt of an award for volunteer medical service, that article was not accompanied by information about its author or where it was published as required by regulation, and so cannot establish eligibility. AAO found no deficiency in the Director's analysis of this criterion necessitating remand.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO noted that while the Director did not analyze one article about the Petitioner's receipt of an award for volunteer medical service, that article was not accompanied by information about its author or where it was published as required by regulation, and so cannot establish eligibility. AAO found no deficiency in the Director's analysis of this criterion necessitating remand.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-20_01_B2203; source_row=33283 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
What the decision said
AAO found the Director's analysis of this criterion was fatally flawed: it misstated the Petitioner's specialty, cited exhibits not actually in the record, overlooked comparative citation evidence the Petitioner did submit, and improperly applied the 'extensive documentation' statutory standard to an individual criterion. AAO remanded rather than deciding the merits.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's analysis of this criterion was fatally flawed: it misstated the Petitioner's specialty, cited exhibits not actually in the record, overlooked comparative citation evidence the Petitioner did submit, and improperly applied the 'extensive documentation' statutory standard to an individual criterion. AAO remanded rather than deciding the merits.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-20_01_B2203; source_row=33284 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 show national importance. The Petitioner's educational background and work experience, while relevant to prong two, did not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. The creation of 21 jobs in five years does not rise to the level of national importance, and broad unsupported claims about competitive impact were insufficient.…
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 show national importance. The Petitioner's educational background and work experience, while relevant to prong two, did not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. The creation of 21 jobs in five years does not rise to the level of national importance, and broad unsupported claims about competitive impact were insufficient. Even a regionally focused endeavor must demonstrate broad impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_02_B5203; source_row=33275 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c