Date of Decision: NOV 23, 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: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Artistic Display: The Petitioner met the artistic display criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). The evidence submitted demonstrated participation in significant artistic exhibitions or showcases, which was deemed sufficient for this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Awards: The Petitioner did not meet the awards criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). No evidence of major, internationally recognized awards was provided.
Published Material: The Petitioner failed to satisfy the published material criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). The submitted documents did not meet the required standards.
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not fulfill the leading or critical role criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). The evidence did not support claims of holding significant roles within distinguished organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: (if applicable)
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of awards that met the criterion for major, internationally recognized prizes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: (if applicable)
The materials submitted did not meet the standards for this criterion, failing to demonstrate significant recognition in relevant media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: (if applicable)
There was no evidence provided that demonstrated original contributions of major significance to the field.
Participation as a Judge: (if applicable)
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of participating as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Membership in Associations: (if applicable)
Membership evidence in associations was not provided or did not meet the required standards for this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: (if applicable)
The Petitioner did not submit scholarly articles that would satisfy this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: (if applicable)
As noted, the evidence did not demonstrate that the Petitioner performed in leading or critical roles within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: (if applicable)
The Petitioner’s participation in artistic exhibitions or showcases met the artistic display criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: (if applicable)
No evidence was provided to support claims of high salary or remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: (if applicable)
No evidence was submitted to demonstrate commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
- Sworn Statement: Detailed the Petitioner’s immigration history and issues with previous legal assistance. However, it did not address how the Petitioner’s accomplishments met the required criteria.
- Testimonial Letters: Submitted letters did not satisfy the regulatory criteria or provide evidence of national or international acclaim.
- Correspondence and Applications: Provided documents related to previous immigration filings but did not support meeting additional regulatory criteria.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reconsider and the motion to reopen were both denied.
Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to provide new evidence or demonstrate that previous decisions were incorrect based on law or USCIS policy. The evidence did not meet at least three of the ten categories listed under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).
Next Steps: It is recommended that the Petitioner seek further legal advice to understand the requirements and gather substantial evidence that meets the criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
