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.
AAO declines to reach the merits of exceptional ability and remands for the Director to determine eligibility in the first instance, noting the Director may request additional evidence including evidence that the offered position requires an individual of exceptional ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declines to reach the merits of exceptional ability and remands for the Director to determine eligibility in the first instance, noting the Director may request additional evidence including evidence that the offered position requires an individual of exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_01_B5203; source_row=31587 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO concluded that musical performances should be considered 'artistic exhibitions or showcases' intended to showcase the Petitioner's musical talent as a bassoonist, and that she therefore satisfies the plain language of the criterion. AAO withdrew the Director's determination.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO concluded that musical performances should be considered 'artistic exhibitions or showcases' intended to showcase the Petitioner's musical talent as a bassoonist, and that she therefore satisfies the plain language of the criterion. AAO withdrew the Director's determination.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_02_B2203; source_row=31593 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
What the decision said
AAO declined to reach this criterion because even if the Petitioner established it, she still could not meet the required number of three criteria, making a decision on this ground unnecessary.
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 this criterion because even if the Petitioner established it, she still could not meet the required number of three criteria, making a decision on this ground unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=31584 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The Petitioner's argument that the criterion does not apply to her profession was rejected, precluding consideration of comparable evidence. The video presentation submitted was given to a general audience of Spanish-speaking fashion lovers, not learned persons in the field, and was not shown to qualify as 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 +
The Petitioner's argument that the criterion does not apply to her profession was rejected, precluding consideration of comparable evidence. The video presentation submitted was given to a general audience of Spanish-speaking fashion lovers, not learned persons in the field, and was not shown to qualify as major media.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=31580 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
Step 2 final merits determination was not reached because the Petitioner failed at step 1. AAO nonetheless noted in dicta that the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Step 2 final merits determination was not reached because the Petitioner failed at step 1. AAO nonetheless noted in dicta that the record does not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_01_B2203; source_row=31585 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · Well positionedNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · Well positioned
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's association roles did not demonstrate that these entities had any interest in devoting resources to the United States. He failed to explain how he would conduct research in the United States, maintain access to Korean technologies from abroad, fund his endeavor, or identify specific buyers or products for any proposed sales.
Why this is useful
Identify the progress, resources, outside interest, or record-to-plan connection that AAO expected to see.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's association roles did not demonstrate that these entities had any interest in devoting resources to the United States. He failed to explain how he would conduct research in the United States, maintain access to Korean technologies from abroad, fund his endeavor, or identify specific buyers or products for any proposed sales.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_04_B5203; source_row=31605 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
The Petitioner failed to identify any specific research area, technique, or technology he proposes to bring to the United States, and did not explain how sales of U.S. medical equipment to Korea would benefit the United States at a nationally important scale. Reference letters were conclusory and lacked probative details.
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 Petitioner failed to identify any specific research area, technique, or technology he proposes to bring to the United States, and did not explain how sales of U.S. medical equipment to Korea would benefit the United States at a nationally important scale. Reference letters were conclusory and lacked probative details.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-29_04_B5203; source_row=31604 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c