Date of Decision: July 11, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Curator and Historian
Field: Expressive Realism Art
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging: The petitioner met the judging criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations: The petitioner’s membership in an art association did not meet the criterion because the association did not require outstanding achievements for membership. The provided documentation did not demonstrate that the association’s membership was based on recognized national or international achievements.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that their contributions, such as facilitating art donations, were of major significance in the field. The letters submitted focused on the importance of the donated art rather than the petitioner’s contributions.
Display at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner did not demonstrate that their work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases. The letters provided showed the petitioner’s role as a gallery owner and mentor but did not establish that the petitioner’s work was on display.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that they performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation. The documentation did not include details about the organizational hierarchy or the petitioner’s specific duties and impact.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner’s involvement in facilitating art donations and their role as a gallery owner were not demonstrated to be of major significance in the field of expressive realism art.
Participation as a Judge: The petitioner met this criterion by serving as a judge in their field.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner’s membership in the art association did not fulfill the criterion as it did not require outstanding achievements for its members.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: The petitioner’s roles were acknowledged, but the evidence did not establish that they performed in a leading or critical capacity for organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner did not establish that their work was displayed in artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Supporting Documentation
The documentation included letters from art experts, translations of association statutes, and letters from individuals who had their first shows at the petitioner’s gallery. However, 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 they met the judging criterion, 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 their 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.
