Date of Decision: June 24, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Orchestra Concertmaster
Field: Music (Orchestral Performance)
Nationality: [Nationality not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Artistic Exhibitions: The petitioner met the artistic exhibitions criterion. The evidence provided showed that the petitioner participated in significant artistic exhibitions, showcasing her talent and contributions to her field.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Awards: The petitioner failed to demonstrate recognition through lesser awards. The evidence submitted did not meet the required standards to prove that the awards received were significant within her field.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not meet the criterion for a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations. The evidence provided was insufficient to establish that the orchestra she was part of had a distinguished reputation, nor did it adequately show her role as leading or critical.
Original Contributions: The petitioner did not satisfy the criterion for original contributions of major significance in her field. The evidence presented did not demonstrate the required level of impact or recognition.
High Salary: The petitioner claimed to have received a high salary, but the evidence was inconclusive. The documentation provided did not adequately support her claims of high remuneration compared to others in her field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence of awards and prizes that demonstrated national or international acclaim.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
There was no substantial evidence submitted showing published material about the petitioner in major media or professional publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s contributions were not deemed to be of major significance within the field of orchestral performance. The provided evidence lacked the necessary impact and recognition.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of participation as a judge of the work of others in her field.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s memberships in professional associations were not highlighted or considered relevant in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
There was no evidence submitted showing the petitioner’s authorship of scholarly articles in her field.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner’s role as concertmaster was not substantiated with evidence showing it was a leading or critical role in a distinguished organization.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated participation in artistic exhibitions, which was one of the criteria met.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner claimed a high salary but failed to provide independent, corroborative evidence to support the claims of remuneration, leading to the criterion not being met.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
There was no evidence submitted showing commercial successes in the performing arts relevant to the petitioner’s case.
Supporting Documentation
Employment Verification Letter: Provided details about the petitioner’s salary and non-salaried compensation but lacked independent corroborative evidence.
Form W-2 (2017): Documented the petitioner’s salary but did not provide a comprehensive overview of additional remuneration claims.
Letters of Recommendation: Previously submitted but did not provide new evidence on the second motion.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The petitioner’s motions to reconsider and reopen were both dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to demonstrate an incorrect application of law or policy in the previous decisions. The new evidence submitted did not overcome the grounds for dismissal or prove eligibility for the requested classification.
Next Steps: For future petitions or appeals, it is crucial to provide comprehensive, corroborative evidence for each criterion claimed. Ensuring that all evidentiary requirements are met and well-documented can significantly impact the outcome of the petition.
This blog post provides a detailed overview of the USCIS appeal review for an EB1 Extraordinary Ability case, following the specific structure requested. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to ask.
