Date of Decision: November 27, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Development Executive
Field: Business Development
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material: The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence of published material about him and his work, featured in Architectural Digest and home decor industry publications, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
High Salary or Remuneration: The Director initially found that the Petitioner commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration in relation to others in his field, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix).
Criteria Not Met:
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not initially provide sufficient independent evidence establishing the distinguished reputation of the organization where he held a leading role, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). Upon review, the Petitioner’s assertions were found persuasive, and the record contained substantial independent evidence demonstrating the company’s distinguished reputation, thereby meeting this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner provided articles about his work in major media, satisfying this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Initially not met, but upon review, the Petitioner’s role was recognized as leading or critical in a distinguished organization, satisfying this criterion.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Director initially found that the Petitioner’s salary was high, but upon further review, it was determined that the salary comparison data was not meaningful or appropriate, and thus this criterion was not satisfied.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including articles, evidence of high salary, and evidence of his role within a distinguished organization. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that he met at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Petitioner satisfied the criteria for published material and leading or critical roles upon review, the evidence provided did not establish his high salary in relation to others in his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of his contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit his qualifications.
