Date of Decision: November 5, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Consultant
Field: Not specified
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner demonstrated that he performed in a critical role with a distinguished organization, satisfying the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner claimed to have made original contributions of major significance, but the evidence did not sufficiently support this claim.
High Salary or Other Remuneration: The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence of earning a high salary relative to others in the field.
Memberships in Associations: The petitioner did not initially claim this criterion but later attempted to demonstrate it on the motion to reconsider, which was not allowed.
Published Materials in Major Media: Similarly, this was a new claim made on the motion to reconsider and was not considered.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The document does not provide details on awards or prizes won by the petitioner.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted articles and other published materials, but they were not established as being from major trade publications or media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s contributions were not demonstrated to have major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not submit evidence meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not initially address this criterion but later claimed it on the motion to reconsider, which was not permitted.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The document does not provide details on the authorship of scholarly articles by the petitioner.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner performed a critical role with a distinguished organization, meeting this criterion.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The document does not provide details on artistic exhibitions or showcases involving the petitioner.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner submitted evidence of remuneration but failed to provide adequate comparative data to establish it was high relative to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner did not claim or provide evidence for this criterion.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted various documents, including letters of recommendation and evidence of contributions, but they were insufficient to meet the required criteria for demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The motion to reconsider was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria. The evidence provided did not demonstrate that the petitioner met at least three of the ten criteria, and contributions were not shown to have major significance in the field. The petitioner’s claims and evidence, while notable, did not rise to the level of demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of their field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner should address specific deficiencies noted in the decision in any future filings. This includes providing substantial and detailed evidence of national or international acclaim, ensuring all filing requirements are met, and potentially seeking further legal advice to strengthen the petition.
