Date of Decision: March 3, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Art Director and Photographer
Field: Photography and Art Direction
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The Petitioner met the criteria by providing evidence of several awards, including a 2018 gold prize at a professional competition and a third-place finish in a 2013 competition.
Published material about the alien in professional or major media: Provided articles from InStyle Magazine and other media, demonstrating coverage in major media.
Participation as a judge of the work of others: Presented evidence of judging three competitions and inclusion as a jury member in a publication.
Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases: Met the criterion by demonstrating that her work has been displayed at various exhibitions.
Criteria Not Met:
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments: The Petitioner did not establish that her roles in organizations were leading or critical enough to meet the high standards of the classification.
High remuneration for services: Provided some evidence of high remuneration but did not substantiate it to the required standard.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner provided evidence of several awards, including a 2018 gold prize, a third-place finish in 2013, and a second-place finish in 2015. However, the prestige and recognition of these awards were not sufficiently established.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not shown that her achievements received significant attention and as a result, has not demonstrated her prizes and awards are commensurate with those among the top of her field.”
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner presented articles from notable publications such as InStyle Magazine, but the overall media coverage did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Key quotes or references: “She provided circulation statistics from Comscore demonstrating this publication qualifies as major media.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: Not applicable in this case as it was not claimed or evaluated.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence of judging competitions, but the quality and significance of these judging roles were not adequately demonstrated.
Key quotes or references: “The record supports the Petitioner’s eligibility claims related to this requirement because she provided evidence indicating she had judged three competitions.”
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: Not claimed or evaluated.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
Summary of findings: Not claimed or evaluated.
Leading or critical role performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that her roles were sufficiently leading or critical to meet the criterion.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not illustrated how playing a part in an advertisement campaign for a line of smartphones is impactful on an entire organization.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner demonstrated her work was displayed at various exhibitions, but the prestige of these venues was not sufficiently established.
Key quotes or references: “Her showings largely consisted of small and local events.”
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner provided evidence of high remuneration, but it did not meet the necessary standard due to inconsistencies and lack of comparative data.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not shown that her earnings as reflective of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor.”
Commercial successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: Not applicable in this case as it was not claimed or evaluated.
Supporting Documentation
Awards certificates and competition results: Provided evidence of various awards but did not sufficiently establish the prestige of these awards.
Articles and media coverage: Included notable articles from InStyle Magazine, but overall media coverage did not demonstrate the necessary level of acclaim.
Judging documentation: Emails and publications listing the Petitioner as a judge in competitions, which were partially accepted.
Exhibition records: Evidence of participation in exhibitions, but the prestige of these events was questioned.
Remuneration records: Provided tax returns and letters indicating high remuneration, but lacked comparative data.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal dismissed. The Petitioner did not demonstrate eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not establish that the Petitioner has risen to the very top of her field, nor did it demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps:
Recommendations: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of high prestige awards, more significant media coverage, and more substantial documentation of high remuneration.
Next steps for the petitioner: Review the decision in detail, address the noted deficiencies, and consider reapplying with additional supporting evidence.
