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.
Ten years of full-time experience (employer letters)
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO withdrew the Director's finding because neither of the employer letters stated that the Petitioner was employed on a full-time basis, and the record showed he was simultaneously working for multiple companies, undermining any inference of full-time work for any single employer.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO withdrew the Director's finding because neither of the employer letters stated that the Petitioner was employed on a full-time basis, and the record showed he was simultaneously working for multiple companies, undermining any inference of full-time work for any single employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-10_07_B5203; source_row=33166 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO held that the 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) definition of 'profession' applies throughout the entire section, including to the professional association criterion, and that the Petitioner's organizations are open to anyone interested in their purposes and do not restrict membership to professionals.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO held that the 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) definition of 'profession' applies throughout the entire section, including to the professional association criterion, and that the Petitioner's organizations are open to anyone interested in their purposes and do not restrict membership to professionals.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-10_07_B5203; source_row=33168 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the letters and documentation showed the Petitioner's contributions to individual companies but failed to establish the significance of those contributions to the import/export field or industry as a whole. The AAO also noted that complimentary letters about the Petitioner's skills speak to a final merits determination rather than to recognized achievements and contributions under this criterion.
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 letters and documentation showed the Petitioner's contributions to individual companies but failed to establish the significance of those contributions to the import/export field or industry as a whole. The AAO also noted that complimentary letters about the Petitioner's skills speak to a final merits determination rather than to recognized achievements and contributions under this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-10_07_B5203; source_row=33169 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / ManagementBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO did not address the first prong on its merits, instead remanding all Dhanasar analysis to the Director because the threshold EB-2 qualification issue was not properly resolved.
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 did not address the first prong on its merits, instead remanding all Dhanasar analysis to the Director because the threshold EB-2 qualification issue was not properly resolved.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-10_06_B5203; source_row=33163 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / ManagementBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
exceptional ability criteria and final merits
What the decision said
Because neither the Director nor AAO has yet evaluated the exceptional ability criteria, AAO remanded for the Director to conduct this analysis in the first instance.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because neither the Director nor AAO has yet evaluated the exceptional ability criteria, AAO remanded for the Director to conduct this analysis in the first instance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-08-10_06_B5203; source_row=33162 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c