Date of Decision: February 10, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Journalist
Field: Journalism
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Published Material About the Petitioner in Professional or Major Media
The petitioner met this criterion by having articles published in The Guardian and Politico that discussed her work as a journalist in Russia.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 2: Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The petitioner claimed that her co-authored article cited in a book and her publications in [Magazine Name] should qualify as scholarly articles. However, the articles were deemed journalistic and intended for the general public rather than learned individuals in the field. Additionally, the petitioner did not provide evidence that [Magazine Name] is a professional or major trade publication with high circulation.
Criterion 3: Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations
Although the petitioner provided evidence of the distinguished reputation of the organizations she worked with, the evidence did not demonstrate that her roles were critical to the overall success of these organizations. The petitioner’s roles were considered as providing contractual services rather than contributing significantly to the organizations’ success.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles in The Guardian and Politico were considered but did not cover enough ground to satisfy additional criteria.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not contest the initial finding that she did not meet this criterion on appeal, effectively waiving this issue.
Participation as a Judge:
No evidence provided to satisfy this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not claim or provide evidence for this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s articles were considered journalistic rather than scholarly, and the publication did not meet the required standards.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s roles were not proven to be critical to the success of the organizations she worked with.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
Photographs and Certificates: Photos of awards and certificates.
Letters of Reference: Letters from colleagues and associates detailing the petitioner’s contributions and roles.
Media Documentation: Articles from The Guardian and Politico.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability. The evidence provided did not establish the petitioner’s national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability, focusing on contributions with major significance, awards with national or international recognition, and other achievements that demonstrate standing at the top of the field. Exploring other immigration options that may be more suitable given the evidence available is also recommended.
