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 831–840
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Computer Science / AIEngineer
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO finds that letters from experts describing the Petitioner's machine learning algorithm, CIM framework, and unmanned aerial systems guidelines, combined with citation evidence (248 citations, top 1% since 2018; 2018 article in top 10% with 97 citations in a top-ranked journal), establish major significance by a preponderance.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds that letters from experts describing the Petitioner's machine learning algorithm, CIM framework, and unmanned aerial systems guidelines, combined with citation evidence (248 citations, top 1% since 2018; 2018 article in top 10% with 97 citations in a top-ranked journal), establish major significance by a preponderance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_04_B2203; source_row=44028 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO explicitly reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner's failure to meet the initial evidentiary threshold was dispositive, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly reserved the final merits determination because the Petitioner's failure to meet the initial evidentiary threshold was dispositive, citing INS v. Bagamasbad.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_06_B2203; source_row=44051 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
Well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
What the decision said
The AAO reserved judgment on the second prong because the Petitioner's failure under the first prong was dispositive, making any finding on the second prong unnecessary.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
The AAO reserved judgment on the second prong because the Petitioner's failure under the first prong was dispositive, making any finding on the second prong unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_03_B5203; source_row=44024 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Official academic record showing degree (criterion A)
What the decision said
AAO reserved judgment on criterion (A) because the Petitioner failed to meet at least two other criteria, rendering any finding on (A) purely advisory and unnecessary to the outcome.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved judgment on criterion (A) because the Petitioner failed to meet at least two other criteria, rendering any finding on (A) purely advisory and unnecessary to the outcome.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_03_B5203; source_row=44017 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
At least ten years of full-time experience (criterion B)
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner submitted letters from former employers but most lacked required job duty descriptions, and employment after the petition filing date could not be considered. One employer letter met requirements but was insufficient alone to establish ten years. The CPA letter was not from a 'former employer' as required by the regulation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner submitted letters from former employers but most lacked required job duty descriptions, and employment after the petition filing date could not be considered. One employer letter met requirements but was insufficient alone to establish ten years. The CPA letter was not from a 'former employer' as required by the regulation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_03_B5203; source_row=44018 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field (criterion F)
Why AAO was not persuaded
The record contained recommendation letters and complementary emails praising the Petitioner's skills and success in specific projects, but none of the letters explained how his work contributed to the field more broadly beyond his immediate employers and customers. The Petitioner's on-appeal argument did not address the Director's conclusion on lack of broader contributions.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record contained recommendation letters and complementary emails praising the Petitioner's skills and success in specific projects, but none of the letters explained how his work contributed to the field more broadly beyond his immediate employers and customers. The Petitioner's on-appeal argument did not address the Director's conclusion on lack of broader contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_03_B5203; source_row=44022 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWlicense or certificationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
license or certification
License to practice or certification for a profession or occupation (criterion C)
Why the evidence was persuasive
The AAO disagreed with the Director, finding that the record contained a copy of the Petitioner's relevant certification that satisfied the plain language of the criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The AAO disagreed with the Director, finding that the record contained a copy of the Petitioner's relevant certification that satisfied the plain language of the criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2025-04-10_03_B5203; source_row=44019 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c