Date of Decision: March 31, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Fashion Model
Field: Modeling
Nationality: Australian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The Petitioner met the criterion related to the display of her work at artistic exhibitions or showcases, notably through her Fashion Week appearances in New York, London, Milan, and Paris, as well as various magazine covers and editorial shoots.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards and Prizes: The Petitioner provided evidence of receiving the STM Award at the Western Australian Fashion Awards, but the Director concluded that this award was not nationally or internationally recognized. The award was limited to models from three agencies in Western Australia and was selected through an online public vote.
- Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in the Models.com community. However, there was insufficient evidence that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
- Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner provided evidence of judging a model search event, but it lacked sufficient corroboration and did not demonstrate she judged the work of others in the same or allied field.
- Original Contributions: The Petitioner did not provide specific evidence of original contributions of major significance in the modeling field.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner did not submit documentation of scholarly articles intended for learned persons in her field.
- Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner’s participation in various charity events did not establish a leading or critical role within an organization or establishment with a distinguished reputation.
- High Salary or Remuneration: The Petitioner’s documented earnings were below the average incomes for models in the U.S. and Australia, according to newly submitted salary surveys.
- Commercial Successes: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of box office receipts or sales that reflected commercial success in the performing arts.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- STM Award at WA Fashion Awards (2016): Considered local/regional and not nationally or internationally recognized.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Various Magazine Features: Included covers and editorial shoots, but did not meet the criterion for published scholarly articles.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- No Specific Evidence Provided: General assertions of contribution to sales were insufficient to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
- Model Search Event (2016): Insufficient evidence and not aligned with judging work in the same or allied field.
Membership in Associations:
- Models.com Community: Lacked evidence of requiring outstanding achievements for membership.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Guest Blogging and Magazine Contributions: Did not qualify as scholarly articles for learned persons.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Charity Event Participation: Did not establish a leading or critical role within an organization or establishment.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Documented Earnings: Below average for models in relevant regions.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Promotional Videos and Commercials: No evidence of significant box office receipts or sales.
Supporting Documentation
- Western Australian Fashion Awards: Details of the STM Award and its local significance.
- Models.com Profile: Evidence of the Petitioner’s community membership and its benefits.
- Model Search Event Correspondence: Invitations and participation details for judging.
- Reference Letters: From modeling agencies, brand managers, photographers, and designers, praising the Petitioner’s attributes.
- Salary Comparisons: Data showing the Petitioner’s earnings in relation to industry averages.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or original contributions of major significance in the modeling field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider additional documentation or alternative immigration options that align more closely with her qualifications.
