Date of Decision: DEC 19, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Actress
Field: Performing Arts
Nationality: [Not provided in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner served as a judge by publishing two theatrical reviews for NY Theatre Guide, fulfilling the judging criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions: The Petitioner performed in stage productions at notable venues, meeting the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii).
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner played significant roles in various productions and organizations, including as cofounder and executive producer of her production company, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of Lesser Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner’s claimed awards and grants were not recognized as nationally or internationally significant under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i).
Published Material About the Petitioner: The articles submitted did not primarily focus on the Petitioner or were not from major media, failing the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Findings: The Petitioner provided evidence of awards and grants but did not establish their national or international recognition. The materials did not specifically identify the Petitioner as an award recipient, and the documentation was insufficient to show the awards’ significance.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Findings: The Petitioner presented several articles and blog posts, but most did not primarily focus on her or were not from major media. The self-promotional material from the publications was not enough to establish them as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Findings: While the Petitioner demonstrated significant original work in various productions, the evidence did not show that her contributions had a major impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Findings: The Petitioner served as a judge by publishing reviews for NY Theatre Guide, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Findings: The document does not mention any specific memberships in associations requiring outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Findings: Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Findings: The Petitioner’s roles as executive producer, artistic director, and lead actress in various productions fulfilled this criterion, but evidence of her company’s distinguished reputation was insufficient.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Findings: The Petitioner’s performances in notable venues met the criterion for artistic exhibitions.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Findings: Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Findings: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Reviews: Provided various articles and reviews, many of which did not primarily focus on the Petitioner.
Recommendation Letters: Letters from colleagues and experts supporting her significant roles in productions and organizations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time major achievement or at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability. The provided documentation did not support a finding that the Petitioner has established the level of acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more robust evidence of her contributions’ significance and potentially reapplying if additional substantial evidence can be presented. Consulting with an immigration attorney for further guidance and preparation may also be beneficial.
