Date of Decision: June 5, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Contemporary Artist
Field: Arts
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner satisfied this criterion by demonstrating that his work had been displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases in China.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The petitioner did not provide evidence that the awards he received were recognized on a national or international level. The documentation showed that the awards were not recognized broadly outside of the specific competitions he participated in.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner claimed membership in professional associations but did not provide evidence that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The petitioner submitted screenshots from various websites discussing his research, but these materials did not qualify as major media coverage, and the petitioner did not demonstrate that the websites were recognized in the field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner provided media reports, publications, presentations, and letters of recommendation. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that these contributions were of major significance in the broader field. The media reports primarily discussed the potential future impact of the research rather than its current significance.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner provided articles and a book but did not demonstrate that these were published in major trade or professional publications or that they were scholarly in nature.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner claimed to have played a critical role in certain establishments, but did not show that these constituted qualifying organizations or establishments. The petitioner did not establish that he held a leadership position or that his role was of significant importance to the organization’s success.
High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not identify documents confirming that he received a high salary or other significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field of photography.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable based on the field of contemporary art.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The petitioner did not present evidence of nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field of photography.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The material provided did not qualify as major media coverage. The petitioner did not establish that the publications discussing his work were major trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The letters from colleagues and evidence of citations did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions were of major significance. While his work was recognized, it was not shown to have a transformative impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge: No evidence was provided that the petitioner served as a judge in the field of contemporary art.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner’s claimed memberships did not meet the criterion of requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner did not provide evidence of authoring scholarly articles in major publications.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: The petitioner did not demonstrate holding a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner demonstrated that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions, fulfilling this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not demonstrate a high salary in the field of contemporary art.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The documentation included letters from colleagues, copies of published articles, evidence of participation in exhibitions, and letters of support. However, much of the evidence did not meet the necessary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documentation that meets at least three of the ten criteria. While the petitioner satisfied the criterion for artistic exhibitions, 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 gathering more substantial evidence of individual achievements and acclaim within the field, focusing on personal awards, critical reviews, and documented contributions of major significance to strengthen future petitions.
