Date of Decision: March 2, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Actor
Field: Film and Television Acting
Nationality: [Not specified in the provided document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the work of others:
The Petitioner was a member of the Nominating Committee for the 25th Annual Screen Actors Guild (SAG) Awards in 2018, which qualifies as judging the work of others in her field.
Display of her work at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The Petitioner’s significant role in the 2010 Canadian film “Film Title” was screened at several film festivals, including the [Film Festival Name] and [Another Film Festival Name].
Criteria Not Met:
Published materials in professional publications or major media:
The Petitioner submitted articles from various Canadian print and online publications. However, most did not meet all regulatory requirements, such as being about her work in acting or appearing in major media. Some articles were outdated or lacked proper authorship and date information.
Original contributions of major significance:
The Petitioner claimed her creation of a TV Reality Series was an original contribution. However, the show had not aired, and the evidence did not demonstrate a significant impact on the field.
Leading or critical roles for organizations with a distinguished reputation:
The Petitioner provided letters from industry professionals, but these did not establish that she held leading or critical roles for the organizations as a whole.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration:
The Petitioner provided evidence of her earnings, but these did not establish that she commanded a high salary compared to others in her field.
Commercial successes in the performing arts:
The Petitioner cited box office receipts and ratings for certain projects. However, she did not provide sufficient evidence linking these successes directly to her involvement in a manner that met the criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of winning major internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings:
The submitted articles did not meet the necessary criteria, such as being from major media or focused on her acting career.
Key quotes or references:
“The Director observed that some of the articles are about the Petitioner and relate to her work as an actor, but found insufficient evidence to establish that the articles, published by [Magazine Name] and actorsentertainment.com, respectively, appeared in professional, major trade, or major media publications.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings:
The creation of a TV Reality Series was acknowledged, but it had not been aired, and there was no demonstrated major impact.
Key quotes or references:
“The evidence is insufficient to establish the ‘major significance’ of a television series that has not yet found a distributor, filmed an episode, or aired before a viewing audience.”
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner successfully met this criterion through her involvement in the SAG Awards Nominating Committee.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings:
Not applicable to this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings:
Not applicable to this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings:
Letters from industry professionals did not substantiate leading or critical roles within organizations.
Key quotes or references:
“The letters do not establish that she held a leading or critical position for these organizations.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner met this criterion through the screening of her work at film festivals.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner provided evidence of her earnings, but they did not establish a high salary compared to her peers.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings:
Evidence of commercial success was provided but was insufficient to meet the criterion.
Key quotes or references:
“The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence linking these successes directly to her involvement in a manner that met the criterion.”
Supporting Documentation
Judging Work:
Evidence of participation in the SAG Awards Nominating Committee.
Published Materials:
Various articles from Canadian media.
TV Series Development:
Synopsis, budget, co-production contract, IMDb page.
Recommendation Letters:
Letters from industry professionals regarding roles and contributions.
Earnings:
Tax returns, IRS Forms W-2, contracts, payments, and residuals.
Film Festivals:
Evidence of film screenings at festivals.
Box Office and Ratings:
Box office receipts, ratings data, DVD sales.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed. The Petitioner does not qualify for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements by failing to satisfy at least three of the ten criteria. Although she provided evidence for some criteria, it was insufficient to establish the required level of acclaim and recognition in her field.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of her achievements and contributions or exploring other visa categories that might be more suitable for her qualifications and career trajectory.
