Date of Decision: April 16, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Actress
Field: Entertainment (Acting and Modeling)
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others:
The Petitioner served as a jury member for the [Film Festival] held in 2016, supporting the Director’s determination that she meets this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Organizations that Require Outstanding Achievements:
The Petitioner claimed eligibility based on her membership in the [Private Members Club] and [Filmmaking Union]. However, the evidence did not establish that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts in the field.
Published Material in Major Media:
The Petitioner submitted articles from various publications but did not provide evidence that these publications are major media or professional trade publications. Therefore, the criterion was not met.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
While the Petitioner submitted letters praising her talents and abilities, these letters did not demonstrate that her contributions were of major significance to the field of acting.
Leading or Critical Roles for Organizations with Distinguished Reputation:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that her roles in various projects were leading or critical to organizations with distinguished reputations. The letters submitted did not sufficiently detail her impact on the success or standing of these organizations.
High Salary or Other Significantly High Remuneration:
The evidence provided did not appropriately compare the Petitioner’s earnings to those in the same field and geographical area. Therefore, this criterion was not met.
Key Points from the Decision
Judging the Work of Others:
Summary of Findings:
The Petitioner’s role as a jury member for a film festival demonstrated her expertise and recognition in the field.
Key Quotes or References:
“The record reflects that the Petitioner served as a jury member for the Film Festival held in 2016 and therefore supports the Director’s determination that she meets this criterion.”
Membership in Organizations that Require Outstanding Achievements:
Summary of Findings:
The memberships claimed did not meet the criterion due to insufficient evidence of outstanding achievement requirements.
Key Quotes or References:
“The evidence does not demonstrate that the club requires outstanding achievements as an essential condition for membership.”
Published Material in Major Media:
Summary of Findings:
The submitted articles were not shown to be from major media or professional trade publications.
Key Quotes or References: “The Petitioner did not provide evidence that [the publication] is a major media publication.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of Findings:
Letters from industry professionals praised the Petitioner’s work but did not demonstrate major significance.
Key Quotes or References:
“The Petitioner has not established any original contribution that has had an identifiable impact beyond the occasions where she performed and the institutions hosting or sponsoring those performances.”
Leading or Critical Roles for Organizations with Distinguished Reputation:
Summary of Findings:
The Petitioner did not establish that her roles were critical to organizations with distinguished reputations.
Key Quotes or References:
“The fact that the Petitioner appeared in commercials for a well-known brand is not sufficient to establish that she meets this criterion.”
Supporting Documentation
Membership Documentation:
Evidence of the Petitioner’s membership in the [Private Members Club] and [Filmmaking Union].
Published Articles:
Articles from various publications, with some including the required title, date, and author.
Reference Letters:
Letters from industry professionals praising the Petitioner’s talents and contributions.
Income Documentation:
Statements of income and deal memos indicating earnings.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet the requirement of at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability.
The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the top individuals in the field of acting.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering additional evidence that directly demonstrates the impact and recognition of her work on a national or international scale.
Consulting with an immigration attorney specializing in extraordinary ability petitions may help in better presenting the case for future appeals or petitions.
