Date of Decision: March 16, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Branding and Design Agent
Field: Branding and Design
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Evidence of the display of the alien’s work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases
The petitioner provided sufficient evidence that the beneficiary’s work appeared in notable exhibitions, such as the [Exhibition A] and the [Exhibition B].
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation
Documentation showed the beneficiary’s critical role as an art director and marketing consultant for [Organization A] and [Organization B]. Published material demonstrated that these organizations have a distinguished reputation.
Criteria Not Met:
Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor
The provided awards did not meet the required level of national or international recognition, as they were not sufficiently recognized beyond the presenting organizations.
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media
The submitted articles lacked proper author identification and did not provide sufficient evidence of being published in major media.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field
The petitioner’s claims about the beneficiary’s original contributions lacked specific evidence demonstrating major significance in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The provided awards (e.g., Gold award in “Real Estate” category) were substantial in number and lacked evidence of recognition beyond the competition organizer.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The provided articles lacked proper author identification and circulation statistics, failing to demonstrate major media recognition.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
Letters from professionals in the field asserted the originality of the beneficiary’s work but lacked specific examples and documentary evidence of major significance.
Participation as a Judge
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
Evidence demonstrated the beneficiary’s critical role in notable organizations, satisfying this criterion.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
The beneficiary’s work was sufficiently displayed in artistic exhibitions, meeting the criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Exhibition Evidence: Photos and records of the beneficiary’s work displayed at [Exhibition A] and [Exhibition B].
- Organizational Roles: Documentation of the beneficiary’s roles at [Organization A] and [Organization B], along with evidence of the organizations’ distinguished reputations.
- Award Certificates: Certificates and descriptions of the awards received by the beneficiary.
- Published Articles: Copies of articles mentioning the beneficiary’s work, though lacking in proper author identification and circulation statistics.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to establish the beneficiary’s eligibility for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. Specifically, the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as being at the top of the field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider submitting a motion to reopen or reconsider if new evidence or arguments are available.
Download the Full Petition Review Here.
