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 agreed that the criterion was not met, but on different grounds: while the Petitioner did have PPA membership at filing, she failed to show that PPA qualifies as a 'professional association' because photography does not require at least a baccalaureate degree for entry into the occupation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed that the criterion was not met, but on different grounds: while the Petitioner did have PPA membership at filing, she failed to show that PPA qualifies as a 'professional association' because photography does not require at least a baccalaureate degree for entry into the occupation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_04_B5203; source_row=31313 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the Director's finding, concluding that many articles lacked required author or date information, most articles were about the team rather than the Petitioner individually, and YouTube screenshots lacked titles, dates, authors, and transcripts.
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, concluding that many articles lacked required author or date information, most articles were about the team rather than the Petitioner individually, and YouTube screenshots lacked titles, dates, authors, and transcripts.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_01_B2203; source_row=31298 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · High remunerationEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · High remuneration
high salary or other significantly high remuneration
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO reversed the Director's finding, concluding that a letter stating the Petitioner's monthly salary of DR$350,000 compared to the average range of DR$50,000–DR$200,000 for players in the same position, reviewed alongside an article confirming the minimum salary range, was sufficient by preponderance of the evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reversed the Director's finding, concluding that a letter stating the Petitioner's monthly salary of DR$350,000 compared to the average range of DR$50,000–DR$200,000 for players in the same position, reviewed alongside an article confirming the minimum salary range, was sufficient by preponderance of the evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_01_B2203; source_row=31300 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / ManagementBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agrees the Petitioner did not specify the type of endeavor, did not quantify expected job creation, did not show substantial positive economic effects or impact in an economically depressed area, and the advisory opinion's description of the endeavor was inconsistent with the Petitioner's own professional plan.
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 agrees the Petitioner did not specify the type of endeavor, did not quantify expected job creation, did not show substantial positive economic effects or impact in an economically depressed area, and the advisory opinion's description of the endeavor was inconsistent with the Petitioner's own professional plan.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_02_B5203; source_row=31305 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO disagreed with the Director and withdrew the finding. The Petitioner's claim was a vague general statement without identifying specific evidence of recognition, specific achievements or significant contributions, or the parties conveying recognition, and she pointed to unidentified previously submitted exhibits without explanation.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO disagreed with the Director and withdrew the finding. The Petitioner's claim was a vague general statement without identifying specific evidence of recognition, specific achievements or significant contributions, or the parties conveying recognition, and she pointed to unidentified previously submitted exhibits without explanation.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_04_B5203; source_row=31314 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
ten years of full-time experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the Petitioner did not submit employer letters meeting the regulatory requirements, that her résumé showed only intermittent employment and student status in F-1 status limiting full-time work, and that her appeal arguments were conclusory without identifying specific supporting evidence.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the Petitioner did not submit employer letters meeting the regulatory requirements, that her résumé showed only intermittent employment and student status in F-1 status limiting full-time work, and that her appeal arguments were conclusory without identifying specific supporting evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_04_B5203; source_row=31312 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Medicine / Clinical
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The AAO found that while the Petitioner's evidence showed the general importance of nursing and healthcare, it did not demonstrate that her specific proposed endeavor would have a national-level impact beyond her immediate employer and patients. The record lacked specificity about the capacity in which she would work and the broader impact of her individual contributions.
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 found that while the Petitioner's evidence showed the general importance of nursing and healthcare, it did not demonstrate that her specific proposed endeavor would have a national-level impact beyond her immediate employer and patients. The record lacked specificity about the capacity in which she would work and the broader impact of her individual contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-03-09_03_B5203; source_row=31308 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c