Date of Decision: November 16, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Makeup Artist
Field: Arts
Nationality: Moldovan
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- None: The petition did not meet any of the required criteria as per the Director’s decision and the subsequent appeal review.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish eligibility under this criterion.
- Membership in Associations: The petitioner claimed membership in the Theater Union of Moldova (UNITEM), but did not provide enough evidence to prove it required outstanding achievements.
- Published Materials About the Petitioner: The petitioner cited publications in Aquarelle magazine but did not provide independent, objective evidence to support that it is a major medium.
- Participation as a Judge: The petitioner did not clarify her role sufficiently in the fashion project as either a jury member or a makeup artist, and did not address the evidentiary deficiencies noted by the Director.
- High Salary: The petitioner’s accountant provided a letter with salary comparisons, but it lacked corroborative evidence and did not adequately explain how the comparative category matched the petitioner’s occupation.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: This criterion was mentioned in the initial appeal but was not supported with evidence or arguments in the brief, and thus was considered abandoned.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- The petitioner did not meet the criterion for lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards, as the evidence provided was deemed insufficient.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- The petitioner cited Aquarelle as a trade publication but failed to provide independent, objective evidence to support this claim. USCIS does not accept self-promotional material or unsupported assertions as valid evidence.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The petitioner’s initial brief mentioned this criterion but did not provide any supporting evidence or arguments, leading to its abandonment in the appeal process.
Participation as a Judge:
- The evidence provided was unclear regarding the petitioner’s role in the fashion project, and the Director’s initial concerns about the nature of her judging activities were not addressed adequately.
Membership in Associations:
- The petitioner provided evidence of membership in the Theater Union of Moldova (UNITEM) but did not convincingly demonstrate that this membership required outstanding achievements as per USCIS criteria.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- The petitioner claimed this criterion but did not provide sufficient evidence or arguments to support her claim.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- The petitioner provided a letter from her accountant, but it did not include corroborative evidence such as payroll or tax statements and did not convincingly match her salary to those of comparable professionals in her field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Brief and Additional Evidence: The petitioner submitted a brief and additional evidence on appeal, asserting errors in the Director’s findings. However, these were insufficient to overcome the initial decision.
- Letters and Publications: Various letters and publications were provided but did not meet the evidentiary standards required by USCIS.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Director’s initial decision to deny the petition.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to meet the required criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability in the arts. The evidence provided was either insufficient or did not address the deficiencies noted by the Director.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider providing more substantial and corroborative evidence in future filings or seek alternative immigration pathways that better align with her qualifications and documentation.
