Date of Decision: February 21, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
- Profession: Actor
- Field: Arts
- Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
- Initial Decision: Denied
- Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Criterion 1: [Description not provided in the document]
- Criterion 2: [Description not provided in the document]
- Criterion 3: [Description not provided in the document]
Criteria Not Met:
- Sustained National or International Acclaim: The petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim through extensive documentation.
- Top Percentage of the Field: The petitioner did not establish that he was among the small percentage at the top of his field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- The petitioner did not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Participation as a Judge:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Membership in Associations:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not specifically mentioned or summarized in the document.
Supporting Documentation
- The petitioner submitted copies of court cases from 1994, 1995, and 2008, as well as non-precedent appellate decisions from 2004 and 2007. These decisions were found to be ineligible for the extraordinary ability classification due to being decided under previous adjudicative policy guidance, which is not applicable to the present case.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reconsider was dismissed.
Reasoning:
- The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the previous motion decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he was among the small percentage at the top of his field.
Next Steps:
- The petitioner should gather additional and substantial documentation that clearly demonstrates sustained national or international acclaim and meets the criteria for being in the top percentage of the field. It is advisable to seek legal counsel to better understand the requirements and prepare a stronger case if considering future motions or appeals.
