Date of Decision: June 15, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Orchestral Violinist
Field: Music (Orchestral Performance)
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: None
The Director determined that the petitioner did not meet any of the ten initial evidentiary criteria for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Evidence of a One-Time Achievement
The petitioner did not provide evidence of a one-time achievement such as a major, internationally recognized award.
Criterion 2: Receipt of Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards
The petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of orchestral performance.
Criterion 3: Membership in Associations
The petitioner did not provide evidence of membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Criterion 4: Published Material About the Petitioner
The petitioner did not submit sufficient published material about his work in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Criterion 5: Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others
The petitioner did not provide evidence of participation as a judge of the work of others in the field of music.
Criterion 6: Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his contributions were of major significance to the field of orchestral performance.
Criterion 7: Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The petitioner did not provide evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.
Criterion 8: Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Criterion 9: Leading or Critical Role
The petitioner did not provide evidence of leading or critical roles for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation.
Criterion 10: High Salary or Remuneration
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his salary or remuneration was high relative to others in the field of orchestral performance.
Criterion 11: Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
The petitioner did not provide evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner did not submit adequate published material about his work in professional or major trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his contributions were of major significance to the field of orchestral performance.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of participation as a judge of the work of others in the field of music.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of leading or critical roles within organizations of distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his salary was high relative to others in the field of orchestral performance.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Publications: The petitioner did not provide sufficient articles or publications about his work.
Letters of Reference: The petitioner did not submit adequate letters from colleagues and associates detailing his contributions and roles.
Awards Documentation: The petitioner did not provide sufficient documentation of awards received.
Employment Records: The petitioner did not provide adequate records of leading roles in orchestral organizations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was summarily dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not address or contest the grounds for denial or identify any erroneous conclusions of law or statements of fact by the Director. The petitioner failed to submit additional evidence or a brief to support his appeal within the given time frame. The petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required to demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability, focusing on awards with national or international recognition, significant contributions, and other achievements that demonstrate his standing at the top of the field. Exploring other immigration options that may be more suitable given the evidence available is also recommended.
