Date of Decision: October 5, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Actor
Field: Performing Arts
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material: The Director found that the Petitioner met the criterion for published material under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner’s evidence, including reference letters, did not establish that his contributions were of major significance in the field of acting, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v).
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that he performed in a leading or critical role for entities with a distinguished reputation. The inconsistencies in the reference letters and lack of independent corroboration weakened the claim, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence provided.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner met the criterion for published material, as the Director acknowledged.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The evidence did not demonstrate that the Petitioner’s contributions were of major significance. Reference letters did not provide sufficient detail or independent corroboration of major impact.
Participation as a Judge:
No evidence provided.
Membership in Associations:
No evidence provided.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No evidence provided.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner’s roles in organizations such as an acting coaching business and a South African performing arts organization were not sufficiently documented to demonstrate leading or critical roles.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including reference letters and descriptions of his roles in different organizations. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not demonstrate that the Petitioner met the required evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. The inconsistencies in the reference letters and lack of independent evidence weakened the claims. The Petitioner did not show that his contributions were of major significance or that he played a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of their contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit their qualifications.
