Date of Decision: September 15, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Creative Technologist
Field: Creative Technology
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 they played a leading or critical role in distinguished establishments. Evidence showed their involvement in significant multimedia displays and projects for various high-profile clients.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner’s work was displayed at various artistic exhibitions or showcases. This included interactive multimedia displays at tradeshows, tourist attractions, and museums.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner failed to provide evidence that their membership in the Society for Experiential Graphic Design (SEGD) required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. The documentation did not detail specific membership requirements or an evaluation process by national or international experts.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The provided materials from websites like cnbc.com and nytimes.com were about the projects the petitioner contributed to but did not mention the petitioner specifically. Additionally, profile pages on SEGD and Communication Arts websites lacked critical information like title, date, and author, and were considered self-manufactured.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The reference letters and other evidence provided did not convincingly show that the petitioner’s contributions had a significant impact on the overall field. The claims made were not sufficiently backed by documentary evidence demonstrating widespread implementation or significant influence.
High Salary or Remuneration
The petitioner’s salary was compared to the average salary of graphic designers, which was deemed an inappropriate comparison. There was no substantial evidence to show that the petitioner’s salary was high in relation to others in the specific field of creative technology.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable as no major, internationally recognized award was claimed.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Provided materials did not meet the regulatory requirements as they did not specifically discuss the petitioner or their work.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s contributions were praised in reference letters but lacked concrete evidence of significant impact or influence in the broader field.
Participation as a Judge:
Not claimed or discussed in the decision.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s membership in SEGD was not supported by evidence of outstanding achievement requirements judged by experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not claimed or discussed in the decision.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated a leading or critical role in distinguished establishments.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner’s work was displayed at notable exhibitions and showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s salary was high in relation to others in their field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable as it was not claimed or discussed in the decision.
Supporting Documentation
Reference Letters:
Letters from former employers and academic advisors praising the petitioner’s work and contributions.
Project Descriptions:
Descriptions and media coverage of projects the petitioner worked on.
Salary Documentation:
Forms W-2 and Occupational Outlook Handbook data provided for salary comparison.
Membership Documentation:
Information about SEGD membership, lacking specifics on requirements and judging process.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. The overall record did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The petitioner should gather more substantial and specific evidence to support claims of extraordinary ability. This includes detailed documentation of membership requirements in associations, published materials specifically about the petitioner, evidence of original contributions with significant impact, and appropriate salary comparisons.
