Date of Decision: March 26, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Multimedia Artist
Field: Multimedia and Video Animation
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizes:
The petitioner received the following awards:
2019 Animated Video Producer of the Year
2019 and 2020 Animated Videos Producer with International Prominence
These awards were granted by entities that recognize excellence across various artistic and entertainment fields. The recognition extended beyond the context of the awards ceremonies, supported by media articles.
Published materials in major media:
The petitioner submitted articles about his work as a creator of animated videos published by a media outlet considered to be a major medium, which provided sufficient evidence to meet this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Original artistic contributions of major significance:
While the petitioner presented letters from professionals and professors praising his work, they did not sufficiently demonstrate the major significance or influence of his contributions in the field.
Display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The petitioner claimed this criterion based on a presentation at a conference in Ohio, but did not provide additional evidence or promotional materials to establish it as an artistic exhibition or showcase.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner was recognized with several awards, but only those related to his field of multimedia and animation were considered valid.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles from recognized media outlets were submitted and accepted as meeting the criterion for published material.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Letters and social media followings were provided, but lacked detailed, probative evidence of significant impact in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not address this criterion in the appeal and it was considered waived.
Membership in Associations:
Not specifically addressed in the document.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
Not specifically addressed in the document.
Leading or critical role performed:
Not specifically addressed in the document.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Insufficient evidence was provided to demonstrate the display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not specifically addressed in the document.
Commercial successes in the Performing Arts:
Not specifically addressed in the document.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner provided various forms of evidence, including:
Letters from professionals and professors
Articles published in recognized media
Awards and certificates
Social media followings and engagements
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or major contributions in the field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial and detailed evidence to support claims of extraordinary ability or explore other visa options that might be more suitable for his qualifications and achievements.
