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 9211–9220
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialEstablishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Electrical / Electronic Engineering
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found the second interview, on a Chinese News Network outlet with over 46 million daily unique visitors, was substantively about the Petitioner and his work and satisfied the plain-language requirements, including the major-media element.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the second interview, on a Chinese News Network outlet with over 46 million daily unique visitors, was substantively about the Petitioner and his work and satisfied the plain-language requirements, including the major-media element.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-19_01_B2203; source_row=30786 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
Original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's support letters described only incremental additions to the field rather than already-realized significant contributions. Citation comparisons based on total cumulative citations rather than individual article impact were insufficient, and the Petitioner failed to benchmark his citation rates against recognized contributions of major significance in the field.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's support letters described only incremental additions to the field rather than already-realized significant contributions. Citation comparisons based on total cumulative citations rather than individual article impact were insufficient, and the Petitioner failed to benchmark his citation rates against recognized contributions of major significance in the field. Publishing in prestigious journals alone does not demonstrate a contribution of major significance.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-18_01_B2203; source_row=30780 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience equivalent to master's degree
Why the evidence was persuasive
AAO found that despite some gaps in the evidence, the record as a whole suffices to establish the required experience by a 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 found that despite some gaps in the evidence, the record as a whole suffices to establish the required experience by a preponderance of the evidence.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-18_01_B5203; source_row=30782 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Social SciencesBachelor’s
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the original proposed endeavor focused on teaching a small number of students with no broader field impact. Post-filing changes to the proposed endeavor (business plan, franchise) constituted impermissible material changes and could not retroactively establish eligibility. The record also contained conflicting information about the basic nature of the endeavor.
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 original proposed endeavor focused on teaching a small number of students with no broader field impact. Post-filing changes to the proposed endeavor (business plan, franchise) constituted impermissible material changes and could not retroactively establish eligibility. The record also contained conflicting information about the basic nature of the endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-18_01_B5203; source_row=30783 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Biomedical / Life SciencesPhD
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
Final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted that the aggregate record does not support the required acclaim.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO declined to conduct a formal final merits determination because the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence threshold, but noted that the aggregate record does not support the required acclaim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-18_01_B2203; source_row=30781 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWlicense or certificationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Social Sciences
Issue evaluated
license or certification
license to practice or certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
Petitioner did not identify her field with the initial filing or RFE/NOID responses, did not show her expertise was significantly above that in the field of education, and did not support her claim that no license is required.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Petitioner did not identify her field with the initial filing or RFE/NOID responses, did not show her expertise was significantly above that in the field of education, and did not support her claim that no license is required.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-17_02_B5203; source_row=30767 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO agreed and additionally found that two certificates the Acting Director failed to discuss were issued after filing and merely reflected mandatory training, not significant contributions.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed and additionally found that two certificates the Acting Director failed to discuss were issued after filing and merely reflected mandatory training, not significant contributions.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2023-01-17_02_B5203; source_row=30770 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c