Date of Decision: OCT. 22, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Actress
Field: Performing Arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None: The Petitioner did not satisfy any of the initial evidentiary criteria.
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence:
The Petitioner claimed to have received the “Best of New York” award, but the evidence did not demonstrate her receipt of the award, nor its national or international recognition for excellence.
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media:
The Petitioner submitted an article from broadwayworld.com, but it was not primarily about her. It mentioned her as one of the actors, failing to meet the criterion.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field:
Recommendation letters praised the Petitioner’s acting skills, but they did not demonstrate her impact on the field at a significant level or provide specific, detailed information about her contributions.
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation:
The Petitioner submitted a management agreement signed after the initial filing of the petition. She did not show her role as leading or critical at the time of filing nor the distinguished reputation of the organization.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that she received any nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
An article from broadwayworld.com was submitted, but it did not focus on the Petitioner, only mentioning her briefly among other actors.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Letters praised the Petitioner’s skills but lacked specific evidence of significant contributions to the field of performing arts.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable in this case.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable in this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner did not demonstrate a leading or critical role in any distinguished organization at the time of filing.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Management Agreement: Signed after the initial filing, did not show leading or critical role.
- Recommendation Letters: Praised acting skills but lacked evidence of major contributions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements of either a one-time achievement or documentation fulfilling at least three of the ten criteria. The evidence provided did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of awards, media coverage, original contributions, and leading roles to strengthen any future petitions.
