Date of Decision: August 5, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Painter
Field: Visual Arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The Petitioner, a painter, sought classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not establish, as required, that he met the initial evidence requirement by satisfying at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director further found that the Petitioner did not establish that his entry would substantially benefit prospectively the United States. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal upon de novo review.
Criteria Met
Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The Petitioner met this criterion by demonstrating that his work has been exhibited at several gallery exhibitions.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner claimed several awards, including honorable mentions and finalist statuses in various competitions. However, the evidence provided did not establish that these awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field of painting. The AAO found that the Petitioner did not demonstrate the national or international significance of these awards.
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed eligibility for this criterion based on his membership in an international art association. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The AAO noted that the association’s membership criteria were broad and did not provide sufficient details to establish the required level of recognition.
Published Material in Major Media: The Petitioner submitted articles about his work. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that these sources qualify as major media. The articles did not include sufficient information regarding the publication’s significance or circulation to meet the criterion.
Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations: The Petitioner claimed to perform leading roles in various galleries. However, the evidence provided was insufficient to establish that these galleries had distinguished reputations or that his roles were critical to their success. The AAO noted that the Petitioner’s participation in exhibitions did not automatically equate to leading or critical roles for the galleries.
High Salary or Remuneration: The Petitioner provided evidence of sales prices for his paintings. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that his remuneration was significantly high relative to others in his field. The AAO found that the Petitioner did not provide comprehensive comparative data to support his claim.
Final Merits Determination
The AAO concluded that the Petitioner did not meet the initial evidentiary requirement of at least three of the ten criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The AAO found that the Petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim and did not demonstrate that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The Petitioner should ensure that all evidence clearly demonstrates the required levels of recognition and impact in his field.
