Date of Decision: September 2, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Director of Photography
Field: Cinematography
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases
The Petitioner provided evidence of their work being showcased at multiple film festivals. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center acknowledged that the Petitioner met this criterion, recognizing the film festival screenings.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
The Petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of awards for their individual work. While involved in award-winning films, the awards were not attributed to the Petitioner directly.
Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements
The Petitioner claimed membership in the Belgian Society of Cinematographers (SBC). However, the provided evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that SBC membership requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published material about the Petitioner in professional or major trade publications
The provided articles did not meet all regulatory requirements. For example, articles from Voyage LA and Kodak Lens Magazine lacked adequate supporting information to qualify as professional or major media.
Original contributions of major significance
Letters from industry experts praised the Petitioner’s work but lacked specific evidence of major significance or widespread impact on the field of cinematography.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments
This criterion was reserved and not discussed in detail since the Petitioner did not meet the minimum three criteria required for further consideration.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration
This criterion was not addressed or met.
Commercial success in the performing arts
Box office receipts and streaming success were not adequately demonstrated to establish commercial success relative to peers.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner’s involvement in award-winning films was noted, but these awards were not directly attributed to them, failing to meet the criterion for lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The articles provided did not satisfy all the regulatory requirements. Major publications mentioned the Petitioner, but the focus was not sufficiently on them and their work.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Expert letters praised the Petitioner’s contributions, but lacked specific, corroborative evidence of significant impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable or discussed in the provided document.
Membership in Associations:
The evidence regarding SBC membership was insufficient to meet the required criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable or discussed in the provided document.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
This criterion was reserved for further discussion but was not detailed due to the failure to meet the minimum criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Successfully demonstrated through film festival screenings.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable or discussed in the provided document.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Insufficient evidence of commercial success was provided.
Supporting Documentation
Various letters from industry professionals
Box office receipts from Box Office Mojo
Articles from Voyage LA and other publications
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The evidence provided did not sufficiently establish extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may need to provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the required criteria for future petitions. This could include direct awards, detailed impact evidence of contributions, and corroborative documentation for membership and published materials.
