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.
official academic record relating to the area of exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found Petitioner did not resolve the inconsistency about a 1999 issuance date predating the credential's existence and did not show how a zoology/agriculture degree relates to a luxury transportation endeavor.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found Petitioner did not resolve the inconsistency about a 1999 issuance date predating the credential's existence and did not show how a zoology/agriculture degree relates to a luxury transportation endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-13_03_B5203; source_row=29973 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWten years experienceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
ten years experience
letters from employers showing at least 10 years full-time experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO held the regulation requires letters from employers, not government contract records; the employer letters showed only about 8 years 11 months; there are unresolved inconsistencies between the letters and the Petitioner's later assertions; and none of the letters indicate full-time work.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO held the regulation requires letters from employers, not government contract records; the employer letters showed only about 8 years 11 months; there are unresolved inconsistencies between the letters and the Petitioner's later assertions; and none of the letters indicate full-time work.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-13_02_B5203; source_row=29970 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the professor's letter was not from a peer, governmental entity, or industry organization and addressed Dhanasar rather than recognition; the employer certificate and letters had only minimal probative value because contributions to a particular entity are not automatically contributions to the broader field; and the post-filing letter from the current employer could not establish eligibility.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the professor's letter was not from a peer, governmental entity, or industry organization and addressed Dhanasar rather than recognition; the employer certificate and letters had only minimal probative value because contributions to a particular entity are not automatically contributions to the broader field; and the post-filing letter from the current employer could not establish eligibility.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-13_02_B5203; source_row=29972 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
official academic record / degree from institution of learning
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found the article showed the community college, not the manufacturer, was the accrediting institution, and the Petitioner's certificates were not from the two-week joint program nor supplemented by an official academic record.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the article showed the community college, not the manufacturer, was the accrediting institution, and the Petitioner's certificates were not from the two-week joint program nor supplemented by an official academic record.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-13_02_B5203; source_row=29969 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that while the Petitioner's proposed endeavor had substantial merit, he failed to demonstrate national importance because his general claims lacked supporting evidence of prospective impact—no showing of job creation, projected U.S. economic impact, or broader implications for the finance field beyond his employer(s). Industry-level reports are insufficient; the focus must be on the specific proposed 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 that while the Petitioner's proposed endeavor had substantial merit, he failed to demonstrate national importance because his general claims lacked supporting evidence of prospective impact—no showing of job creation, projected U.S. economic impact, or broader implications for the finance field beyond his employer(s). Industry-level reports are insufficient; the focus must be on the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-12_02_B5203; source_row=29955 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
beneficiary's work experience in past 12 months required exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO finds the new evidence does not document employment in the relevant 12-month window; the radio-station letter predates the claimed employment, no contract or payroll records were submitted, the only 2018 performance flyer bears an inconsistent 2023 date, and the one in-window album release was not shown to require exceptional ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO finds the new evidence does not document employment in the relevant 12-month window; the radio-station letter predates the claimed employment, no contract or payroll records were submitted, the only 2018 performance flyer bears an inconsistent 2023 date, and the one in-window album release was not shown to require exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-12_01_B5203; source_row=29952 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Major awardNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Major award
One-time major internationally recognized award
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO acknowledged the Petitioner's achievements were corroborated and were the highest awards in the sport, but found the record lacked evidence that the competitions received broad international recognition outside the sport — no significant media coverage beyond the tour's own website, no large cash prizes, and no evidence the awards were familiar to those outside the sport.…
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO acknowledged the Petitioner's achievements were corroborated and were the highest awards in the sport, but found the record lacked evidence that the competitions received broad international recognition outside the sport — no significant media coverage beyond the tour's own website, no large cash prizes, and no evidence the awards were familiar to those outside the sport. AAO also noted the regulation does not allow substituting lesser awards as one-time achievements.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_01_B2203; source_row=29926 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The salary data was ambiguous regarding timeframe and professional level, the Petitioner did not identify which salary tier applied to her, and even a higher-than-average salary would not necessarily demonstrate that the salary was due to exceptional ability.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The salary data was ambiguous regarding timeframe and professional level, the Petitioner did not identify which salary tier applied to her, and even a higher-than-average salary would not necessarily demonstrate that the salary was due to exceptional ability.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_01_B5203; source_row=29933 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found that while the Petitioner's work may benefit individual companies and clients, she did not demonstrate how that individual benefit rises to national importance or broadly impacts the field. The expert economic opinion offered insufficient evidence to corroborate its conclusions about job creation and economic multiplier effects.
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 that while the Petitioner's work may benefit individual companies and clients, she did not demonstrate how that individual benefit rises to national importance or broadly impacts the field. The expert economic opinion offered insufficient evidence to corroborate its conclusions about job creation and economic multiplier effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_01_B5203; source_row=29936 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c