Date of Decision: December 19, 2017
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Curator and Historian
Field: Arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner served as a judge for artists from 2006 to 2013, and evaluated national and international exhibitions, satisfying this criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations: The petitioner provided a letter of appointment from an association, but did not include supporting documentation showing that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii).
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner claimed to have discovered a significant gap in art history and facilitated the donation of an art collection to American museums. However, the record did not contain sufficient evidence to support this claim as a major contribution. The contributions described were potential future contributions, not realized ones, thus failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v).
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner submitted an essay about an artist, but did not establish that the art catalogue in which it was published is a professional or major trade publication, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Display of Work: The petitioner claimed to have displayed her work by setting up exhibitions and co-owning a gallery. However, the evidence provided did not detail the exhibits or the petitioner’s role, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii).
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not demonstrate that she had performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation. The expectation of future contributions does not fulfill this requirement, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable in this case.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Not applicable in this case.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The claimed contributions were future contributions, not realized ones.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner served as a judge for artists and evaluated exhibitions, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that her membership in an association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s essay did not meet the criteria for publication in a professional or major trade publication.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that she performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner’s evidence did not detail the exhibits or her role sufficiently to meet this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Certificates and Awards: Not provided in the record.
- Articles and Publications: Essay about an artist, but not published in a professional or major trade publication.
- Letters of Support: Letters from colleagues and supervisors, but lacking specific examples of significant impact.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required criteria for EB-1 classification. Despite notable achievements, the petitioner did not establish the level of extraordinary ability required. The evidence provided did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance or a leading or critical role in organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider reapplying with additional evidence or exploring other visa categories that may better suit her qualifications and achievements.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
