Date of Decision: May 29, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Pianist
Field: Music, Piano Performance
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others
The petitioner provided evidence of judging a student musical competition, fulfilling the criterion for participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Criterion 2: Display of the Petitioner’s Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
The petitioner demonstrated that her work was displayed at various artistic and musical venues, including the New York International Artists Association Piano Competition and the IBLA Grand Prize International Competition.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Receipt of Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards
The petitioner claimed awards such as first prize at the New York International Artists Association Piano Competition and an award from the IBLA Grand Prize International Competition. However, the evidence provided did not demonstrate that these awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field. The evidence lacked sufficient material evidencing the national or international significance of the prizes.
Criterion 2: Published Material About the Petitioner
The petitioner submitted articles from Music Review and Music Journal. However, the petitioner did not demonstrate that these publications are considered professional or major trade publications. The provided evidence did not meet the standard of demonstrating that the published materials about her were in major media.
Criterion 3: Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations
The petitioner claimed roles such as music director for a non-profit organization. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s roles were leading or critical to the success of distinguished organizations. The letters of recommendation lacked detailed information and specific documentation supporting the claims.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that she had received lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted articles that mentioned her, but the evidence did not meet the criterion for published material in professional or major trade publications. The circulation statistics provided were insufficient to establish these publications as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner claimed contributions such as her performances and musical direction. However, the evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the major significance or widespread implementation of these contributions in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner provided evidence of serving as a judge for various musical competitions, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable in this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that she held leading or critical roles within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner demonstrated that her work was exhibited at various artistic exhibitions and musical showcases, meeting this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Publications: Various articles and publications about the petitioner’s work.
Letters of Reference: Letters from colleagues and associates detailing the petitioner’s contributions and roles.
Exhibition Records: Documentation of the petitioner’s work being displayed at various exhibitions and competitions.
Judging Records: Evidence of the petitioner’s participation as a judge in various competitions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability. While the petitioner demonstrated participation as a judge and exhibition of her work, the evidence provided did not establish the major significance of her contributions to the field of piano performance. The petitioner did not show that her professional accomplishments placed her among the small percentage at the very top of her field. Additionally, the petitioner did not provide evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability, focusing on contributions with demonstrated major significance, awards with national or international recognition, and other achievements that demonstrate standing at the top of the field. Exploring other immigration options that may be more suitable given the evidence available is also recommended.
