Date of Decision: July 23, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Conga Player and Percussionist
Field: Music
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The Petitioner, an entertainment and production company, seeks to classify the Beneficiary, a conga player, as an alien of extraordinary ability. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Beneficiary had satisfied only one of the initial evidentiary criteria, of which he must meet at least three. Upon de novo review, the decision was withdrawn, and the matter was remanded for a new decision.
Criteria Met
Judging the Work of Others: The Beneficiary served on a jury panel for qualifiers for the 2015 and 2016 awards, satisfying this criterion.
Criteria Not Met
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed eligibility for this criterion based on the Beneficiary’s membership in the Latin Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences (LARAS) and the Society of Authors and Composers of Venezuela (SACVEN). However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The documentation provided did not adequately support the claim that these memberships were based on such criteria.
Published Material in Major Media: The Petitioner submitted several articles about the Beneficiary. However, some articles did not include the author of the material, and the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the sources qualify as major media. The articles did not focus primarily on the Beneficiary’s professional achievements and lacked proper attribution and circulation statistics.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner did not claim this criterion, and the Director did not find evidence to support it.
Additional Analysis for Remand
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Director initially concluded that the Petitioner did not meet this criterion. However, upon review, it was found that the Director did not address all of the evidence in the record with respect to this criterion. The record contains media articles about the awards and the ceremony, which were not fully considered. The Director is instructed to reevaluate this criterion upon remand.
Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations: The Petitioner claimed the Beneficiary met this criterion by being an original member and lead percussionist of the band, a music professor participating in master classes, and a percussionist for a musical celebration. The Director did not address this criterion in the initial decision. The matter is remanded for analysis of the evidence submitted under this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Beneficiary received several awards, but the documentation did not initially support that these were nationally or internationally recognized prizes. This needs reevaluation upon remand.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that published materials about the Beneficiary were in major trade or professional publications or other major media.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis.
Reasoning: The Petitioner must establish that the Beneficiary meets at least three of the ten criteria. The totality of the evidence must demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that the Beneficiary is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The Director’s initial evaluation did not address all relevant evidence.
Next Steps: The Director must reevaluate the evidence regarding the lesser awards criterion and the leading or critical role criterion. If the Beneficiary satisfies at least two additional criteria, the Director should conduct an analysis of the totality of the record to determine if the Beneficiary has demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim and recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of his field.
