Date of Decision: January 9, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Animation Director/Producer
Field: Animation
Nationality: South Korean
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Documentation of the individual’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. The petitioner demonstrated receipt of the Annie Award, which is recognized within the animation industry.
Evidence of the individual’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field. The petitioner provided evidence of significant contributions through various animation projects and roles.
Evidence that the individual has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. The petitioner held leadership roles in several distinguished animation studios and projects.
Criteria Not Met:
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the individual’s work in the field for which classification is sought. The petitioner submitted numerous articles, but many lacked certified translations or evidence to establish them as major publications.
Evidence that the individual has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field. The evidence provided did not sufficiently establish that the petitioner’s earnings were high in comparison to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The Annie Award was recognized, but it did not meet the high threshold of a major, internationally recognized award like a Nobel Prize.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The articles submitted were not sufficiently supported by evidence to prove their stature as major publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The letters of recommendation and articles supported the petitioner’s significant contributions, but they did not clearly establish how these contributions were of major significance to the field as a whole.
Participation as a Judge: Not applicable in this case.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner held memberships and roles within distinguished organizations, but did not provide detailed evidence of how these roles were critical.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: The petitioner demonstrated leadership roles in multiple respected studios and projects.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner’s salary did not sufficiently stand out when compared to peers in the industry.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: The petitioner showed commercial success through various projects, but this was not enough to meet the high threshold required.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Recommendation: Provided strong support but lacked specific examples of major significance.
Articles and Media Coverage: Included various articles, some of which were not properly translated or verified.
Salary Documentation: Showed earnings but lacked sufficient comparative data.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal dismissed
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the high standards set for extraordinary ability, failing to sufficiently demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that they belong to the small percentage at the very top of their field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider providing additional evidence or seeking alternative visa classifications if applicable.
