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 9791–9800
NIWlicense or certificationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Business / Management
Issue evaluated
license or certification
license to practice the profession or certification
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner's Brazilian Bar Association membership was canceled in June 2018, before the I-140 petition was filed. Additionally, the Petitioner did not show that a license or certification is required to practice human resources management.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner's Brazilian Bar Association membership was canceled in June 2018, before the I-140 petition was filed. Additionally, the Petitioner did not show that a license or certification is required to practice human resources management.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_01_B5203; source_row=29932 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance in the field
What the decision said
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy at least three criteria regardless, making analysis of a fourth criterion unnecessary.
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner could not satisfy at least three criteria regardless, making analysis of a fourth criterion unnecessary.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_02_B2203; source_row=29942 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
official academic record relating to the area of exceptional ability
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO withdrew the Director's favorable determination because the Petitioner had not sufficiently documented what her area of exceptional ability actually is, making it impossible to confirm that her program of study relates to it.
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 favorable determination because the Petitioner had not sufficiently documented what her area of exceptional ability actually is, making it impossible to confirm that her program of study relates to it.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_02_B5203; source_row=29943 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWlicense or certificationNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Finance
Issue evaluated
license or certification
license or certification for the profession or occupation
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner invoked the comparable-evidence provision but failed to identify specific evidence and, more fundamentally, had not established what her occupation is, so she could not explain why the standard requirements do not readily apply.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner invoked the comparable-evidence provision but failed to identify specific evidence and, more fundamentally, had not established what her occupation is, so she could not explain why the standard requirements do not readily apply.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-09_02_B5203; source_row=29945 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner impermissibly changed the substantive nature of his proposed endeavor after filing, adding plans to expand S- and market COVID-19 kiosks that were not part of the original petition. Even assuming the revised plan were considered, the Petitioner failed to show that the endeavor's prospective impact rises to the level of national importance beyond his business and its clientele.
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 agreed with the Director that the Petitioner impermissibly changed the substantive nature of his proposed endeavor after filing, adding plans to expand S- and market COVID-19 kiosks that were not part of the original petition. Even assuming the revised plan were considered, the Petitioner failed to show that the endeavor's prospective impact rises to the level of national importance beyond his business and its clientele.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-08_01_B5203; source_row=29923 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO found the evidence established at most localized business-level impacts rather than national importance. The expert opinion letter lacked corroboration and merely restated the Petitioner's claims. Letters of recommendation cited company-specific results without establishing a causal link or national scope. The Petitioner did not show his techniques were unique, innovative, or new to the field.…
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 evidence established at most localized business-level impacts rather than national importance. The expert opinion letter lacked corroboration and merely restated the Petitioner's claims. Letters of recommendation cited company-specific results without establishing a causal link or national scope. The Petitioner did not show his techniques were unique, innovative, or new to the field. The proposed endeavor would benefit individual companies that hire him rather than the nation broadly.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-09-07_01_B5203; source_row=29917 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c