Date of Decision: May 17, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Art Director
Field: Graphic Design and Art Direction
Nationality: [Nationality not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded for further review
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display of Work in Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner provided evidence of displaying work in artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Leading or Critical Roles for Distinguished Organizations: The petitioner submitted letters and supporting documentation from various organizations, but the Director did not adequately address the evidence.
Commercial Success in the Performing Arts: The petitioner claimed this criterion, but the Director did not discuss or acknowledge the evidence provided.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The decision did not indicate that the petitioner met this criterion.
Published Material in Major Media: There was no discussion or evidence provided for this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: No evidence was submitted to support this criterion.
Participation as a Judge: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate judging activities.
Membership in Associations: No documentation of relevant memberships in associations was mentioned.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: No evidence was provided regarding high salary or remuneration.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: No significant contributions were evidenced in the provided documentation.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The decision did not discuss any awards or prizes that met the evidentiary criteria.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
There was no discussion or evidence provided for this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The evidence did not clearly describe or document the petitioner’s judging activities.
Membership in Associations:
The document did not mention any relevant memberships in associations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No evidence was provided to support this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner submitted evidence but the Director’s decision did not adequately address or analyze the evidence provided.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated performance at various artistic and musical venues.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence was provided regarding high salary or remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner claimed this criterion, but the Director did not discuss or acknowledge the evidence provided.
Supporting Documentation
Display of Work: Evidence of displaying work in artistic exhibitions or showcases was provided.
Leading or Critical Roles: Letters and supporting documentation from various organizations demonstrating leading or critical roles.
Commercial Success: The petitioner claimed this criterion, but the evidence was not discussed or acknowledged.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The Director’s decision was withdrawn and the case was remanded for further review.
Reasoning:
The Director failed to adequately explain the reasons for denying the petition and did not properly address the evidence submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to contest the decision, and the record as presently constituted does not establish the petitioner’s eligibility for the benefit sought.
Next Steps:
The Director is instructed to review the petitioner’s supporting letters and evidence submitted under all claimed initial evidentiary criteria. The Director may also request any additional evidence deemed warranted and should allow the petitioner to submit such evidence within a reasonable period of time. The decision should include an analysis of the totality of the record evaluating whether the petitioner has demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim and that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
