Date of Decision: July 5, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Artist Manager
Field: Artist Management
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner claimed eligibility under multiple criteria, but the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) determined that the petitioner did not meet at least three of the required evidentiary criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).
Criteria Met:
- Published Material About the Petitioner: The petitioner demonstrated evidence of professional or major trade publications discussing their work as an artist manager.
Criteria Not Met:
- Performance in a Leading or Critical Role:
- The petitioner claimed leadership roles in multiple organizations.
- The AAO determined that while the petitioner held these positions, the documentation failed to establish the organizations’ distinguished reputations. Letters and certifications were insufficient to support this claim.
- High Salary or Remuneration:
- The petitioner claimed earnings of $500,000 to $1.5 million annually. However, tax returns and financial documents showed significantly lower wages ($130,500 in 2021 and $75,000 in 2022).
- Additional income from business ownership was not considered as high remuneration for the petitioner’s services as an artist manager.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Material About the Petitioner:
Evidence of articles from professional publications met the regulatory standard under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Leadership and Critical Role Claims:
The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the organizations they led had a distinguished reputation within the industry. Supporting letters lacked specific details on the organizations’ impact or prominence.
High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s claimed earnings were unsupported by corroborating financial documentation. Income derived from business ownership was not considered directly related to services as an artist manager.
Other Factors:
The AAO noted that the petitioner previously held O-1 nonimmigrant status. However, the evidentiary requirements for the EB-1 classification are distinct and more stringent, and approval of O-1 status does not guarantee EB-1 eligibility.
Supporting Documentation
Published Material: Articles discussing the petitioner’s work as an artist manager.
Leadership Roles: Evidence of positions held, but insufficient documentation of organizational prominence.
Remuneration Evidence: Financial records and letters that did not substantiate claims of extraordinary earnings.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met one evidentiary criterion but failed to satisfy the regulatory requirement of at least three under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field.
