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 7561–7570
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 had substantial merit but not national importance, as the Petitioner failed to show his specific proposed work would have broader implications beyond his company, sufficiently impact the telecommunications or supply chain industry, or produce substantial positive economic effects nationally.
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 had substantial merit but not national importance, as the Petitioner failed to show his specific proposed work would have broader implications beyond his company, sufficiently impact the telecommunications or supply chain industry, or produce substantial positive economic effects nationally.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_03_B5203; source_row=33280 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Advanced degree or equivalent (five years progressive experience)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed that specific dates of employment are required to verify five years of progressive experience, and the submitted letters lacked this essential information.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that specific dates of employment are required to verify five years of progressive experience, and the submitted letters lacked this essential information.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_03_B5203; source_row=33278 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's decision, finding the Petitioner presented no new evidence or arguments on appeal that overcame the Director's determination regarding national importance.
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 decision, finding the Petitioner presented no new evidence or arguments on appeal that overcame the Director's determination regarding national importance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_01_B5203; source_row=33272 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
When narrowed to the oil and gas industry in Texas, the petitioner's wages fell below the 90th percentile for relevant engineering occupations and below the mean for architectural and engineering managers; the 2022 job offer postdated filing and could not establish initial eligibility.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
When narrowed to the oil and gas industry in Texas, the petitioner's wages fell below the 90th percentile for relevant engineering occupations and below the mean for architectural and engineering managers; the 2022 job offer postdated filing and could not establish initial eligibility.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_01_B2203; source_row=33271 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural EngineeringEngineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Most new evidence postdated the May 2020 filing. Readership statistics did not establish citation-based influence, support letters did not specify how the petitioner's work impacted the field as a whole, and award documentation did not show original work or impact beyond his employer.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Most new evidence postdated the May 2020 filing. Readership statistics did not establish citation-based influence, support letters did not specify how the petitioner's work impacted the field as a whole, and award documentation did not show original work or impact beyond his employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_01_B2203; source_row=33268 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner submitted no new evidence on motion to reopen, and on motion to reconsider failed to show AAO's prior decision was incorrect; conclusory assertions about reputation do not satisfy the burden.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner submitted no new evidence on motion to reopen, and on motion to reconsider failed to show AAO's prior decision was incorrect; conclusory assertions about reputation do not satisfy the burden.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_01_B2203; source_row=33270 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Waiver on balanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Waiver on balance
on balance, beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer requirement
What the decision said
AAO reserved judgment on prong three because the Petitioner had already failed to establish prong one, making a determination on prong three unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
See which endeavor-specific facts mattered to the waiver analysis beyond a preference to self-petition.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved judgment on prong three because the Petitioner had already failed to establish prong one, making a determination on prong three unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_02_B5203; source_row=33277 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
AAO reserved judgment on prong two because the Petitioner had already failed to establish prong one, making a determination on prong two unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved judgment on prong two because the Petitioner had already failed to establish prong one, making a determination on prong two unnecessary to the ultimate decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-18_02_B5203; source_row=33276 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c