Date of Decision: JULY 15, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Opera Singer
Field: Operatic Performance
Nationality: Kosovo
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Display of Work:
The petitioner met the criterion for displaying work as defined by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii).
Criteria Not Met:
Awards and Prizes:
The petitioner did not satisfy the criterion for lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i).
Published Materials:
The petitioner did not meet the criterion for published material about the petitioner at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner did not satisfy the criterion for playing a leading or critical role as defined by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- Summary of Findings: The petitioner claimed to have won the 2014 competition. However, this award had already been considered and found insufficient under the lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes criterion.
- Key Quotes or References: “We affirmed the Director’s determination that the Petitioner had not satisfied the plain language of that one criterion.”
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Summary of Findings: No new significant evidence provided.
- Key Quotes or References: “We found that the Petitioner had not satisfied the plain language of the published material criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge:
- Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
- Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Summary of Findings: The petitioner did not provide specific examples or new evidence.
- Key Quotes or References: “The Petitioner neither specifically addresses any of the other regulatory criteria for the establishment of extraordinary ability nor provides any evidence related to those criteria.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Summary of Findings: Met the display of work criterion.
- Key Quotes or References: “We found, however, that the Petitioner did meet the plain language of the display of his work criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii).”
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Letter from Chairman of the Board: Stated the petitioner won the 2014 competition and emphasized the potential for a major international career. However, it did not address other regulatory criteria.
- Letter from Professor of Voice: Praised the petitioner’s abilities but lacked specific evidence related to the ten regulatory criteria.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen is denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the regulatory requirements for a motion to reopen, as they did not state new facts or provide substantial affidavits related to the eligibility criteria.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more comprehensive evidence addressing the specific regulatory criteria before reapplying.
