Date of Decision: September 16, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Broadcast News Analyst
Field: Broadcasting and Journalism
Nationality: [Nationality Not Provided]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence: The Petitioner provided evidence of multiple awards recognizing her excellence in broadcasting.
- Published materials in professional publications or major media: The Petitioner submitted numerous articles published in major media outlets discussing her work and contributions.
- Authorship of scholarly articles in her field: The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles related to broadcasting and journalism, contributing to the academic discourse in her field.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that her memberships required outstanding achievements.
- Original contributions of major significance in her field: The evidence provided did not establish that the Petitioner’s contributions were of major significance.
- Leading or critical roles with organizations that have a distinguished reputation: The evidence submitted did not sufficiently show that the roles held by the Petitioner were leading or critical in distinguished organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The Petitioner presented evidence of several awards, but the final merits discussion was brief and did not fully address the significance of these awards in establishing extraordinary ability.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The Petitioner provided substantial evidence of published materials discussing her work. These materials highlighted her influence and recognition in the field of broadcasting.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The Director concluded that the Petitioner’s contributions, while notable, did not rise to the level of major significance required for this classification.
Participation as a Judge
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations
The Petitioner’s memberships did not meet the standard of requiring outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Petitioner’s scholarly articles were recognized but not given detailed consideration in the final merits determination.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The Petitioner’s roles were acknowledged but not sufficiently demonstrated to be leading or critical in nature.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Awards: Documentation of awards recognizing the Petitioner’s excellence in broadcasting.
- Published Materials: Articles from major media outlets highlighting the Petitioner’s contributions.
- Scholarly Articles: Authored articles in respected journals and publications.
- Expert Opinion Letters: Letters from industry experts attesting to the Petitioner’s standing and contributions in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision was withdrawn and remanded for further review.
Reasoning: The Director’s decision lacked a detailed final merits analysis, particularly in considering the totality of the evidence provided by the Petitioner. The new decision must include a comprehensive evaluation of all submitted evidence.
Next Steps: The Petitioner should ensure that all additional evidence submitted on appeal is thoroughly reviewed and that a detailed analysis of her qualifications and achievements is conducted in the final merits determination.
