Date of Decision: July 15, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Photographer
Field: Arts
Nationality: Iran
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the individual’s work in the field for which classification is sought:
The Petitioner provided copies of pages from a photography quarterly that featured his work. The entries contained the title, date, and author of the material, focusing on the Petitioner’s photography.
Evidence of the display of the individual’s work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The Petitioner’s work has been displayed in several artistic exhibitions, satisfying this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Documentation of the individual’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor:
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that he received nationally or internationally recognized awards. He failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding the reputation or renown of the competitions or awards.
Documentation of the individual’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient details regarding the criteria used to evaluate an individual’s body of work or the degree of selectivity used in considering an individual’s accomplishments. The provided letters did not establish that membership required outstanding achievements evaluated by national or international experts.
Evidence of the individual’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specification for which classification is sought:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to prove he actually served as a judge in any events.
Evidence of the individual’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field:
The Petitioner claimed to have created a new style of photography but did not provide adequate explanation or supporting evidence to demonstrate the major significance of his contributions.
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales:
This criterion is specific to the performing arts, and the Petitioner is a photographer, which does not fall under this category. Additionally, the evidence provided did not establish commercial success.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner’s work was featured in a photography quarterly, which is considered a professional publication. This criterion was met as the publication focused on his photography work.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner did not meet this criterion as there was no evidence provided that he actually served as a judge.
Membership in Associations:
The letters provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s memberships required outstanding achievements evaluated by recognized experts.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence or explanation to support the claim of creating a new style of photography with major significance.
Commercial Success:
The Petitioner did not meet this criterion as photography does not fall under performing arts, and the provided sales evidence was insufficient to demonstrate commercial success.
Supporting Documentation
- Published material in a photography quarterly: Provided pages with title, date, and author.
- Membership certificates: Provided certificates with letters but lacked details on the selection process and qualifications of the evaluators.
- Letters of appointment as a judge: Lacked evidence of actual participation.
- Exhibition records: Verified that the Petitioner’s work was displayed in several artistic exhibitions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide the requisite initial evidence to establish extraordinary ability as required by the regulations. Satisfaction of at least three criteria is necessary, but the Petitioner met only two. Additionally, the evidence provided did not establish the level of expertise required for the classification sought.
Next Steps: It is recommended that the Petitioner gather more robust evidence to satisfy the criteria, including documented proof of major awards, detailed descriptions of memberships requiring outstanding achievements, and verified records of participation as a judge.
