Date of Decision: October 6, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Entrepreneur
Field: Business
Nationality: Argentinian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- (viii) Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner claimed roles in multiple businesses, including car rental franchises, a used car dealership, a travel agency, and e-commerce platforms in Argentina, and managing a real estate investment firm in the U.S. However, the provided evidence was insufficient to substantiate these roles as leading or critical.
Criteria Not Met:
- (iii) Published Material About the Individual:
Submitted articles did not discuss the petitioner’s work or achievements in the field but merely quoted him regarding a product. - (iv) Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not contest the Director’s conclusions on this criterion on appeal, effectively waiving the claim. - (ix) High Remuneration for Services:
The petitioner did not contest the Director’s conclusions on this criterion on appeal, effectively waiving the claim.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence of major, internationally recognized awards was provided.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles provided were about a brand of e-cigarette, quoting the petitioner as the marketing director but not discussing his work or achievements.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not addressed in the appeal, and the initial submission did not provide evidence to support this criterion.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not address or provide further evidence regarding this criterion on appeal.
Membership in Associations:
Not mentioned or substantiated in the provided evidence.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No scholarly articles authored by the petitioner were provided as evidence.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s claimed roles in various businesses were not substantiated with sufficient evidence.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable to this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide evidence to substantiate claims of high salary or remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable to this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Media Articles:
Submitted articles quoted the petitioner about a product but did not discuss his work or achievements. - Letters of Support:
Provided letters lacked corroboration and substantial details to support the claimed leading or critical roles.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria required for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. The provided evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the top of the field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial and corroborative evidence before reapplying or exploring other immigration options.
