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 8301–8310
NIWEB-1A · High remunerationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
Commanding a salary or remuneration demonstrating exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that the Petitioner's salary is determined by military rank and years of service, not by exceptional ability, and that comparison to entry-level or average salaries across all ranks is unpersuasive. A salary governed by a pay scale does not demonstrate exceptional ability.
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 Petitioner's salary is determined by military rank and years of service, not by exceptional ability, and that comparison to entry-level or average salaries across all ranks is unpersuasive. A salary governed by a pay scale does not demonstrate exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_02_B5203; source_row=32112 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
official academic record (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A))
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the Director's finding because the diploma's stated specialization (programming in automated systems and electronic computers) does not relate to the Petitioner's area of exceptional ability, professional sewing, and the additional certificates were not from colleges, universities, or institutions of learning.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO withdrew the Director's finding because the diploma's stated specialization (programming in automated systems and electronic computers) does not relate to the Petitioner's area of exceptional ability, professional sewing, and the additional certificates were not from colleges, universities, or institutions of learning.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_03_B5203; source_row=32119 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
Final merits determination (exceptional ability)
What the decision said
Because the Petitioner did not meet three initial evidentiary criteria, AAO was not required to conduct a final merits determination. AAO noted it reviewed the record in aggregate and found it insufficient, and also noted the Petitioner did not specifically address the Director's final merits determination on appeal.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because the Petitioner did not meet three initial evidentiary criteria, AAO was not required to conduct a final merits determination. AAO noted it reviewed the record in aggregate and found it insufficient, and also noted the Petitioner did not specifically address the Director's final merits determination on appeal.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_02_B5203; source_row=32115 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWlicense or certificationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
license or certification
License to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or occupation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner effectively conceded that the two documents submitted are not licenses or certifications for the practice of a particular profession or occupation, and did not contest the Director's basis for denial.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner effectively conceded that the two documents submitted are not licenses or certifications for the practice of a particular profession or occupation, and did not contest the Director's basis for denial.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_02_B5203; source_row=32111 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field
Why AAO was not persuaded
The commendations and reference letters recognized the Petitioner for employer-specific services as a military police officer but did not demonstrate significant contributions to the broader security, military, or law enforcement field or the field encompassing his proposed endeavor. Letters praising broad impact were too vague to establish significant contributions beyond his specific employer.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The commendations and reference letters recognized the Petitioner for employer-specific services as a military police officer but did not demonstrate significant contributions to the broader security, military, or law enforcement field or the field encompassing his proposed endeavor. Letters praising broad impact were too vague to establish significant contributions beyond his specific employer.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_02_B5203; source_row=32114 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the Director's denial deficient because it ignored the Petitioner's credential evaluation and provided no explanation for why it was insufficient. AAO remanded for a new decision addressing this evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's denial deficient because it ignored the Petitioner's credential evaluation and provided no explanation for why it was insufficient. AAO remanded for a new decision addressing this evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_01_B5203; source_row=32105 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO found the Director's conclusions were bare and failed to explain the reasoning behind finding no substantial merit or national importance. AAO remanded for a properly reasoned decision.
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 Director's conclusions were bare and failed to explain the reasoning behind finding no substantial merit or national importance. AAO remanded for a properly reasoned decision.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-05-11_01_B5203; source_row=32106 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c