Date of Decision: May 5, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Costume Designer
Field: Design for Athletes and Performers
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The Petitioner provided evidence of her work being displayed at various figure skating, ice dancing, synchronized swimming competitions, theatrical performances, and other artistic exhibitions.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in Associations: The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that her memberships required outstanding achievements as judged by national or international experts.
- Published Material About the Petitioner: The submitted materials did not meet the requirements for being considered major media, and some lacked substantial discussion of the Petitioner’s work.
- Participation as a Judge: Inconsistencies in the documentation regarding her role as a judge in competitions were not resolved, and the evidence was not deemed sufficient.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner did not establish that she made original contributions of major significance to her field.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner did not challenge the Director’s decision on this criterion, leading to it being considered waived.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- Summary of findings: Not applicable as the petitioner did not claim a major, internationally recognized award.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Summary of findings: The materials submitted did not meet the necessary elements to be considered qualifying media.
- Key quotes or references: Not provided due to insufficiency in evidence.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not fulfill the initial evidentiary requirement of demonstrating at least three criteria.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge:
- Summary of findings: The evidence provided had inconsistencies regarding the judging process, leading to it being discounted.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
- Summary of findings: The Petitioner’s memberships did not show required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide evidence for this criterion.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Summary of findings: Not applicable as it was not claimed by the petitioner.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Summary of findings: The Petitioner’s work displayed at various competitions and performances was acknowledged.
- Key quotes or references: Verified by documentation.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Summary of findings: Not applicable as it was not claimed by the petitioner.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Summary of findings: Not applicable as it was not claimed by the petitioner.
- Key quotes or references: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters from Association Representatives:
- Summarized findings indicate a lack of specific criteria required for membership.
- Published Articles:
- Articles did not meet the standards for qualifying media.
- Judging Participation:
- Provided letters had inconsistencies and were not sufficiently corroborated by other evidence.
- Exhibition Evidence:
- Verified displays at significant events and competitions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
- The Petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to establish eligibility for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
- The evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate national or international acclaim or recognition in the field.
Next Steps:
- The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence to address the deficiencies noted if reapplying.
