Date of Decision: April 29, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Mastering Engineer
Field: Audio Engineering
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
None of the criteria were conclusively met as the Director’s findings were not upheld on appeal.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving a nationally or internationally recognized award. A certificate acknowledging participation on a Grammy-nominated recording did not meet this criterion.
Published Material About the Alien: The Petitioner provided some articles and book references, but they did not include required details such as publication dates or demonstrate that the publications were major trade or professional media.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner submitted pages from books authored by others in which he was quoted, but did not demonstrate that these were scholarly articles written by him for learned persons in his field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that participation in a Grammy-nominated recording was equivalent to receiving a recognized prize or award.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The articles and book references did not meet the requirements of published material about the Petitioner in major trade or professional publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The evidence provided did not establish the major significance of the Petitioner’s contributions.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in major trade or professional publications.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Supporting Documentation
Certificates and Awards: Provided but did not establish national or international recognition.
Articles and Book References: Did not meet the standards for major trade or professional publications.
Letters from Colleagues and Clients: Praised the Petitioner’s work but did not demonstrate major significance or critical roles.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is 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 criteria. The record does not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
