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 761–770
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot established
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew SCOPS's finding that this criterion was satisfied. The submitted articles were not about the Petitioner as required, some articles lacked identified authors, and the Petitioner failed to establish the websites constituted major trade publications or other major media.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew SCOPS's finding that this criterion was satisfied. The submitted articles were not about the Petitioner as required, some articles lacked identified authors, and the Petitioner failed to establish the websites constituted major trade publications or other major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_02_B2203; source_row=44107 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner submitted income tax records and a salary calculator report comparing his earnings to the mean salary for a 'Lawyer in Brazil,' but failed to use comparable data for law firm partners. The comparison data also was from a different year than the income reported.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted income tax records and a salary calculator report comparing his earnings to the mean salary for a 'Lawyer in Brazil,' but failed to use comparable data for law firm partners. The comparison data also was from a different year than the income reported.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_02_B2203; source_row=44111 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
SCOPS determined the Petitioner's coauthored article was not scholarly, and the Petitioner did not contest this on appeal. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the publication platform was a professional publication or major media.
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 +
SCOPS determined the Petitioner's coauthored article was not scholarly, and the Petitioner did not contest this on appeal. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the publication platform was a professional publication or major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_02_B2203; source_row=44109 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 found that the business plan contained extensive inconsistencies regarding the operating location (citing New York and Florida multipliers while claiming Pennsylvania operations) and material conflicts between the Form I-140 salary ($150,000) and job title ('logistics expert') versus the business plan ($85,000–$103,318 and 'chief executive officer'). These undermined the reliability of all financial 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 found that the business plan contained extensive inconsistencies regarding the operating location (citing New York and Florida multipliers while claiming Pennsylvania operations) and material conflicts between the Form I-140 salary ($150,000) and job title ('logistics expert') versus the business plan ($85,000–$103,318 and 'chief executive officer'). These undermined the reliability of all financial projections. Even setting aside reliability issues, the proposed logistics consulting services and app are duplicative of existing services and lack national or global implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_03_B5203; source_row=44117 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 found the Petitioner had not demonstrated how his proposed safety app and consulting work would impact workplace safety at a national or global scale beyond his employer and its clients. The Petitioner failed to show his work was materially different from other similarly experienced employees in the field or that his job-creation claims had a national-level impact.
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 Petitioner had not demonstrated how his proposed safety app and consulting work would impact workplace safety at a national or global scale beyond his employer and its clients. The Petitioner failed to show his work was materially different from other similarly experienced employees in the field or that his job-creation claims had a national-level impact.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_02_B5203; source_row=44114 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination for exceptional ability
What the decision said
AAO agreed the Director's decision lacked substantive analysis but declined to resolve this issue given that the NIW national importance finding was independently dispositive.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the Director's decision lacked substantive analysis but declined to resolve this issue given that the NIW national importance finding was independently dispositive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-15_02_B5203; source_row=44113 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c