Date of Decision: April 11, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Movie Producer, Director, and Screenwriter
Field: Arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display of Work in Artistic Exhibitions:
The petitioner satisfied this criterion by providing evidence of displaying her work at various film festivals, such as the Cannes Film Festival.
Criteria Not Met:
One-Time Achievement:
The petitioner claimed a “Certificate of Honor” from the Cannes Film Festival as a one-time achievement. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that this certificate is a major, internationally recognized award comparable to a Nobel Prize or an Olympic medal.
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The petitioner provided evidence of various awards, but did not submit sufficient documentation to explain the nature of these awards or demonstrate that they are recognized nationally or internationally for excellence in the field of cinematography.
Published Material:
The petitioner submitted articles and web pages from foreign language newspapers and online publications. However, she did not establish that these publications qualify as major media, professional publications, or major trade publications due to a lack of circulation data and proper certification of translations.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner claimed to have served as a panelist for a film festival, but the evidence only showed she was invited to participate, not that she actually judged the work of others. The submitted photographs and letters were insufficient to establish her role as a judge.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner argued that founding a film festival and her work as a documentary filmmaker constituted original contributions. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that these contributions had a significant impact on the field of cinematography. Letters from other artists commending her work lacked specificity and corroborating evidence.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner claimed to have played a leading role in various organizations, but did not provide evidence detailing her duties or demonstrating how her roles were significant to the organizations’ outcomes. The reputation of the organizations was also not established.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner provided evidence of receiving various awards, but failed to demonstrate their national or international recognition or explain their significance in the field of cinematography.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted articles and web pages, but did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that these publications are major media or professional trade publications. The translations were not properly certified, further weakening this evidence.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s founding of a film festival and her work as a documentary filmmaker were acknowledged, but the evidence did not demonstrate a significant impact on the field of cinematography. Letters of commendation lacked detail and corroboration.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that she judged the work of others in her field. Invitations to serve as a panelist were not adequate to meet this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s roles in various organizations were not sufficiently detailed or supported by evidence to demonstrate their significance.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated that her work was displayed at various film festivals, satisfying this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner provided several pieces of evidence, including:
- Various articles and web pages highlighting her achievements.
- Letters from officials and peers discussing her contributions.
- Documentation of awards and certificates.
- Photographs and summaries of her participation in film festivals.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to meet the initial criteria required for EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. Although the petitioner met one criterion, the evidence did not demonstrate a major contribution in the field of arts. Consequently, the petitioner failed to establish the level of expertise required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider consulting with new legal counsel to explore any further options for appeal or other immigration benefits for which she may be eligible.
