Date of Decision: October 2, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Musician (Guitarist, Composer, and Educator)
Field: Music Performance and Education
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner sought to meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) but satisfied only two criteria, according to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO). The evidence submitted did not establish eligibility for EB-1 classification.
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
- The petitioner served as a judge for music-related work, including evaluating the performance of students and peers in academic or professional contexts.
- Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Evidence showed the petitioner performed in significant artistic showcases, including as a guitarist on two Latin Grammy-nominated albums.
Criteria Not Met:
- Published Material About the Petitioner:
- The petitioner submitted articles from websites focused on jazz and music but failed to demonstrate that these publications qualified as major trade or professional media. Many articles lacked proper author identification, publication dates, or evidence of significant readership or circulation.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- The petitioner presented his doctoral dissertation as evidence but did not establish that the platform where it was published met the regulatory definition of a professional or major trade publication.
- Comparable Evidence:
- Letters of support from renowned musicians were submitted but were not claimed as comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4).
Key Points from the Decision
Published Material:
- Articles submitted did not meet regulatory requirements due to insufficient evidence of their reach or professional relevance. Profiles on websites such as All About Jazz were identified as self-promotion tools, not independently written articles.
Authorship Evidence:
- The petitioner’s dissertation, while scholarly, was published in an institutional repository not demonstrated to qualify as a professional publication.
Letters of Support:
- Reference letters highlighted the petitioner’s abilities but were not sufficient as independent evidence of extraordinary ability.
Final Merits Determination:
- The AAO concluded that the totality of the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Supporting Documentation
Judging Evidence: Participation as a judge in music-related evaluations and competitions.
Exhibition Evidence: Performances in artistic showcases, including participation in Latin Grammy-nominated projects.
Published Material Evidence: Articles and profiles, lacking substantiation as major trade or professional publications.
Authorship Evidence: Doctoral dissertation, insufficiently established as published in a qualifying professional platform.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met two regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). However, the evidence provided did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of music performance and education.
