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.
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
exceptional ability final merits / Kazarian step 2
What the decision said
AAO declined to reach the final merits because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the six exceptional ability criteria, but stated in dicta that the result would not change if it did.
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 the final merits because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the six exceptional ability criteria, but stated in dicta that the result would not change if it did.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-07-20_03_B5203; source_row=32958 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed substantial merit was shown but found national importance was not established. The endeavor would benefit the Petitioner's business and clients but not impact the insurance field more broadly, and the projected economic and job-creation benefits were not supported by sufficient evidence tying them to the proposed endeavor.
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 substantial merit was shown but found national importance was not established. The endeavor would benefit the Petitioner's business and clients but not impact the insurance field more broadly, and the projected economic and job-creation benefits were not supported by sufficient evidence tying them to the proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-07-19_04_B5203; source_row=32937 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AI
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the Petitioner's consulting activities would not sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact the educational field broadly at a level commensurate with 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 found that the Petitioner's consulting activities would not sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact the educational field broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. The business plan lacked staffing, income, or personnel projections; no evidence identified where the company would operate or its economic impact; and the expert opinion letter lacked analysis of the specific proposed endeavor's broader implications.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-07-19_02_B5203; source_row=32930 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed that the Petitioner's evidence addressed the importance of entrepreneurship and small businesses generally rather than the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor. The business is a small family operation with modest revenues, no demonstrated actual investment, and no substantiated plans for expansion into economically depressed areas. Conclusory statements about economic impact lacked probative value.
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's evidence addressed the importance of entrepreneurship and small businesses generally rather than the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor. The business is a small family operation with modest revenues, no demonstrated actual investment, and no substantiated plans for expansion into economically depressed areas. Conclusory statements about economic impact lacked probative value.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-07-19_03_B5203; source_row=32934 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c