Date of Decision: MAY 31, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Musical Director
Field: Music
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The petitioner received the 2016 Musical Director of the Year award and the 2017 Musical Producer of the Year award. However, these awards were not established as nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.
- Participation as a judge of the work of others: The petitioner served as a member of the qualifying jury for a dance-themed competitive reality show. However, there was insufficient independent evidence that the competition took place and was televised as planned.
- Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases: The petitioner’s performances at cultural events intended to showcase music were considered to meet this criterion. However, the director’s interpretation was withdrawn as this criterion is not solely for visual artists.
Criteria Not Met:
- Published material about the individual: The petitioner submitted two published articles, but the publications were not established as major media, and the content did not fulfill all evidentiary requirements.
- High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services: The petitioner submitted invoices, but there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner’s earnings were high compared to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The petitioner claimed awards for Musical Director of the Year (2016) and Musical Producer of the Year (2017). The evidence provided did not establish these awards as nationally or internationally recognized.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: Two articles were submitted, but the publications were not proven to be major media, and the articles did not meet all evidentiary requirements.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: No substantial evidence provided to support this criterion.
Participation as a Judge: The petitioner’s participation as a judge was noted, but there was insufficient evidence that the competition took place and was televised.
Membership in Associations: No substantial evidence provided to support this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: No substantial evidence provided to support this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: Although claimed on appeal, this criterion was not evaluated due to the failure to meet the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner’s performances were considered to meet this criterion upon review.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: No substantial evidence provided to support this criterion.
Supporting Documentation
- Awards: Letters from the president of the awarding foundation, articles about other award recipients.
- Published Material: Two articles from La Voz and Mi Diario.
- Judging Participation: Letters from producers of the reality show.
- Invoices: Two invoices and a receipt indicating payment.
- Media Appearances: Screenshots and letters from producers of television programs.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The evidence provided did not demonstrate the petitioner’s sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the top of the field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial and comprehensive evidence to support their extraordinary ability claim.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
Cite as Matter of G-M-, ID# 20738529.
Document: MAY312022_01B2203
