Date of Decision: June 24, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Musician
Field: Music
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media:
The petitioner provided evidence of a January 3, 2012 article about his band, which meets the criteria for published material about the alien’s work in the field. The publication’s circulation and relation to other major publications in Nepal supported its classification as major media.
Criteria Not Met:
Display of the alien’s work in artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The director found that the petitioner did not meet this criterion as it is limited to visual arts, and the petitioner is a musician, not a visual artist.
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation:
Although the petitioner played leading roles in his bands, the evidence did not demonstrate that these bands had a distinguished reputation. The materials provided were insufficient to establish this criterion.
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services:
The petitioner did not assert this criterion on appeal, and there was no evidence provided regarding earnings or comparative earnings in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- The petitioner’s band was nominated for a prestigious award in Nepal but did not win. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the band’s distinguished reputation.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Articles in major publications and interviews were provided, but their impact and significance were insufficient to establish the band’s distinguished reputation.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Not addressed in the decision.
Participation as a Judge:
- Not addressed in the decision.
Membership in Associations:
- Not addressed in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Not addressed in the decision.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- The petitioner provided evidence of his role in his bands, but the bands’ reputations were not demonstrated as distinguished.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- The criterion was not met as it applies to visual arts.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- No evidence was provided to support this criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not addressed in the decision.
Supporting Documentation
- Articles and Interviews: Various articles and interviews in major publications and blogs were provided.
- Award Nomination: Evidence of the band’s nomination for a prestigious award in Nepal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements by satisfying at least three of the ten regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The petitioner may file a motion to reconsider or reopen the proceeding using Form I-290B within 33 days of the decision date.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
