Date of Decision: February 15, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Artisan, Photographer, and Fashion Designer
Field: Artistic Design, Photography, Fashion
Nationality: Ukraine
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Description: The Petitioner’s work was displayed at recognized artistic exhibitions.
Criterion 2: Leading or Critical Role for an Organization with a Distinguished Reputation
Description: The Petitioner played a critical role in designing interiors for distinguished clients, which was acknowledged in major publications.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Published Material About the Alien in Professional or Major Trade Publications or Other Major Media
Description: Although the Petitioner submitted articles from Vogue UA and domus design, the evidence did not meet the requirement due to timing and lack of independent verification of the publications’ status as major media.
Criterion 2: Evidence That the Alien Has Commanded a High Salary or Other Significantly High Remuneration for Services, in Relation to Others in the Field
Description: The submitted IRS Form 1099 showed remuneration but lacked comparative evidence to establish it as significantly high in relation to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of Findings: No major internationally recognized awards were presented.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of Findings: Articles from Vogue UA and domus design were not considered due to post-filing dates and insufficient evidence of major media status.
Key Quotes or References: The articles were about the Petitioner’s work but failed to meet the required standards.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of Findings: No new evidence was submitted to support this criterion.
Key Quotes or References: N/A
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of Findings: Not claimed or supported.
Key Quotes or References: N/A
Membership in Associations:
Summary of Findings: Not claimed or supported.
Key Quotes or References: N/A
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of Findings: Not claimed or supported.
Key Quotes or References: N/A
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of Findings: Established for interior design projects.
Key Quotes or References: Acknowledged in major publications like domus design.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of Findings: Established with documented exhibitions.
Key Quotes or References: Exhibitions were documented but timing affected the evaluation.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of Findings: Submitted evidence did not sufficiently prove high remuneration.
Key Quotes or References: The 2017 IRS Form 1099 showed remuneration but lacked comparative evidence.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of Findings: Not claimed or supported.
Key Quotes or References: N/A
Supporting Documentation
- IRS Form 1099 (2017): Evidence of remuneration for interior design project.
- Vogue UA Article (2018): Featured Petitioner’s work post-petition filing.
- Domus Design Articles (2006, 2007): Included Petitioner’s work but lacked sufficient independent verification.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen is denied.
Reasoning: The new evidence provided did not satisfy the claimed evidentiary criteria or establish eligibility as an alien of extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional, independently verified documentation and ensure that evidence meets all required criteria at the time of filing.