Date of Decision: August 26, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Jeweler
Field: Jewelry Design and Craftsmanship
Nationality: [Not Provided in Document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner successfully demonstrated that his work has been displayed at various artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The petitioner provided certificates for a “Saint Michael Gold Medal” and a university prize for “Best Overall Performance.” However, these were not established as nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field of jewelry design.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner’s membership in a craftsman’s association was acknowledged, but the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that the association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published Material: The petitioner provided a translated article from Buxoroyi Sharif and other pieces published after the petition’s filing date. However, the petitioner did not demonstrate that these publications were major media or professional trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner claimed to have made significant contributions to the field of traditional Uzbek jewelry but did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate these contributions’ major significance.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner submitted pages from a book, but this did not meet the criteria for scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner’s certificates for a “Saint Michael Gold Medal” and a university prize were found insufficient to demonstrate that they were nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in jewelry design. The petitioner did not provide supporting documentation showing the national or international significance of these awards or the criteria used to grant them.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided a translated article from Buxoroyi Sharif and other pieces published after the petition’s filing date. However, these publications did not meet the regulatory requirements as they were not shown to be major media or professional trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s contributions to the field of traditional Uzbek jewelry were acknowledged, but the evidence did not establish these contributions as having major significance. The letters of recommendation discussed the potential impact of his work rather than its actual influence on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable, as there was no evidence provided for this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s membership in a craftsman’s association was acknowledged, but the evidence did not establish that the association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner submitted pages from a book, but this did not meet the criteria for scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not applicable, as the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to support this claim and it was not evaluated due to failure to meet the initial three criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner’s work was displayed at various artistic exhibitions or showcases, fulfilling this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable, as no evidence of high salary or remuneration was discussed.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable, as the petitioner’s field does not involve commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
Reference Letters: Provided letters from professionals and colleagues recognizing the petitioner’s contributions but lacked sufficient detail to meet the claimed criteria.
Award Documents: Included certificates for various awards but did not establish that the awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence.
Published Articles: Included a translated article from Buxoroyi Sharif and other pieces, but did not focus on the petitioner or establish the publications as major media.
Salary Documents: Not applicable, as no salary information was provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidentiary criteria and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition in his field. The evidence provided was found to be insufficient to establish his eligibility for the EB1 classification.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more comprehensive and corroborative evidence to support his claims, focusing on independent recognition and demonstrating how his work has had a significant impact on his field.
