Date of Decision: JULY 2, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Creative Director
Field: Graphic and Commercial Design
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The petitioner participated as a judge at an annual reports design competition, meeting this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The petitioner failed to demonstrate receipt of awards in a personal capacity or their recognition in the field.
- Membership in Associations: Evidence did not establish that the petitioner’s memberships were based on outstanding achievements as judged by recognized experts.
- Published Material About the Petitioner: The submitted materials were about the petitioner’s work but did not directly highlight the petitioner’s personal contributions or achievements.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions were of major significance in the field.
- Leading or Critical Role: Insufficient evidence to show that the petitioner played a critical role in organizations with a distinguished reputation.
- High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not demonstrate that their salary was high in relation to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
- Awards and Prizes Won: The petitioner submitted numerous design awards, but these were generally awarded to the petitioner’s company, not to the petitioner personally.
- Membership in Associations: Petitioner is a member of the Art Director’s Club (ADC) and the American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA), but failed to demonstrate that these memberships required outstanding achievements.
- Published Materials About the Petitioner: The evidence consisted mainly of general articles about companies for which the petitioner worked, rather than specific articles about the petitioner.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: Although the petitioner claimed significant contributions through his designs, the evidence did not establish their major significance in the field.
- Participation as a Judge: The only criterion clearly met, as the petitioner served as a judge in design competitions.
- Leading or critical role performed: Evidence was insufficient to demonstrate a leading or critical role in organizations with a distinguished reputation.
- Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: While the petitioner earns a good salary, it was not shown to be high compared to others in the same role in the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of recommendation
- Screenshots from professional websites
- Evidence of awards
- Salary information
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed based on the inability to meet the required criteria for classification as an individual with extraordinary ability.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet at least three of the required criteria and failed to demonstrate a level of expertise signifying that they are among the very top of their field.
Next Steps: No specific next steps recommended.
