Date of Decision: February 13, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Disc Jockey (DJ) and Music Producer
Field: Music, specifically in the arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought:
The record contains an article from a major publication, which includes the title, date, and author, confirming it as published material about the petitioner relating to his DJ career. This satisfies the criterion.
Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specification for which classification is sought:
The petitioner submitted evidence demonstrating his participation as a jury panel member for various music festivals, meeting the plain language of this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Documentation of the alien’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields:
The petitioner failed to establish that his memberships in specific associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field:
Although the petitioner submitted testimonial letters praising his talent and influence, the record lacks specific examples demonstrating that his work has significantly impacted the music field or constituted original contributions of major significance.
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation:
The evidence provided does not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for the organizations cited. The roles described do not differentiate him from other DJs, and the impact of his contributions was not adequately documented.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The decision did not discuss any awards or prizes won by the petitioner.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner met this criterion by providing an article from a major publication about his DJ career.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not meet this criterion as the evidence did not show his work had a significant impact on the music field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner met this criterion by demonstrating his role as a jury panel member at various music festivals.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not meet this criterion as his memberships did not require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The decision did not discuss any scholarly articles authored by the petitioner.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not meet this criterion as the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate his leading or critical roles in organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The decision did not discuss any artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The decision did not discuss evidence of high salary or remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The decision did not discuss commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted various supporting documents, including testimonial letters, membership confirmations, and articles, but these were not sufficient to meet the required criteria for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to meet the initial evidence requirements by not satisfying at least three of the ten criteria outlined for EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate the level of expertise and impact required for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider providing more substantial and specific evidence of his contributions and roles within the music industry or explore alternative immigration classifications that may better fit his qualifications and achievements.
