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.
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation
Why the evidence was persuasive
Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (viii), establishing performance in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Both the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner satisfied criterion (viii), establishing performance in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-06-30_01_B2203; source_row=32687 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Civil / Structural Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the initial evidence requirements of at least three criteria.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly declined to conduct a final merits determination because the Petitioner failed to satisfy the initial evidence requirements of at least three criteria.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-06-30_01_B2203; source_row=32693 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
What the decision said
The Petitioner did not dispute the Director's finding that he had not established eligibility under criterion (i) on appeal, and AAO considered the issue abandoned.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not dispute the Director's finding that he had not established eligibility under criterion (i) on appeal, and AAO considered the issue abandoned.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-06-30_01_B2203; source_row=32684 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed on substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to show national importance. The submitted evidence addressed the importance of entrepreneurism and related industries generally rather than the specific proposed endeavor. The business plan projected only modest revenue ($540K–$1.8M) and minimal job creation (3–5 jobs), which did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at a national level.…
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 on substantial merit but found the Petitioner failed to show national importance. The submitted evidence addressed the importance of entrepreneurism and related industries generally rather than the specific proposed endeavor. The business plan projected only modest revenue ($540K–$1.8M) and minimal job creation (3–5 jobs), which did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects at a national level. The Food Circle application was not shown to have broad impact beyond its direct users.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-06-29_04_B5203; source_row=32677 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The AAO agreed that the proposed endeavor — operating a cargo transport and supply chain management company — does not have national or global implications within a field, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects as contemplated by Dhanasar.…
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 +
The AAO agreed that the proposed endeavor — operating a cargo transport and supply chain management company — does not have national or global implications within a field, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects as contemplated by Dhanasar. The Petitioner's arguments about personal expertise and industry-level importance are misplaced because national importance focuses on the specific proposed endeavor, not the individual or the field generally.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-06-29_03_B5203; source_row=32674 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c