Date of Decision: October 5, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Fashion Model
Field: Fashion Modeling
Nationality: [Nationality not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: High Salary or Remuneration
The Petitioner satisfied the criterion of high remuneration, as evidenced by her earnings in the fashion modeling industry. This criterion recognizes individuals who command a high salary compared to others in their field.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Published Material
The Petitioner submitted magazine pages and translations to show her modeling work. However, the materials were deemed to be more focused on fashion trends and marketing rather than about her specific achievements and contributions in the field.
Criterion 2: Leading or Critical Role
The Petitioner claimed roles in significant photoshoots for well-known brands and magazines. Nevertheless, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that she played a leading or critical role in these organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner did not present evidence of major, internationally recognized awards, which is a primary criterion for demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The published materials provided were more focused on the fashion products and trends rather than on the Petitioner’s contributions and achievements, thus failing to meet this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Participation as a Judge:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The roles cited did not meet the required standards of leading or critical roles within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner met this criterion by showing evidence of high earnings in the modeling industry.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
No evidence was provided or argued to meet this criterion.
Supporting Documentation
- Photocopies of Magazine Pages: These included modeling photos and covers from notable magazines. However, they did not sufficiently focus on the Petitioner’s contributions.
- Certified English Translations: Provided for non-English publications but still fell short of demonstrating the Petitioner’s individual acclaim.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner has risen to the top of her field.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence, particularly focusing on demonstrating sustained acclaim and major achievements within her field, before reapplying.
