Date of Decision: October 17, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Violinist
Field: Music Performance
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Awards:
The petitioner met the awards criterion based on her third place finish at the 2015 [competition name redacted] and her award for excellence at the 2007 [competition name redacted].
Judging:
She met the judging criterion based on her participation as a judge at the 2013 [event name redacted].
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner demonstrated her performances at various artistic exhibitions and showcases, such as appearances on stage as a member of the orchestra for [orchestra names redacted].
Criteria Not Met:
Published Materials:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of published materials about her that demonstrate national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions:
Letters discussing the petitioner’s skills did not identify original contributions of major significance in the field of music.
Membership in Associations:
The membership requirements of the associations provided were not equivalent to outstanding achievements recognized in the field.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner’s roles as concertmaster and first violinist for student ensembles were not indicative of her being at the very top of her field.
Evidence of High Salary:
No evidence was submitted to meet the criterion of high salary or remuneration in relation to others in the field.
Commercial Success:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that her collaboration on a video compact disc (VCD) garnered critical acclaim or significant sales.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner’s awards did not indicate national or international acclaim, as many were student awards or from competitions with limited eligibility.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No substantial published materials provided to indicate sustained national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The letters of recommendation did not establish that the petitioner’s contributions were original and of major significance.
Participation as a Judge:
Her participation as a judge was limited to evaluating students rather than acclaimed violinists, which did not demonstrate her being at the top of her field.
Membership in Associations:
The criteria for membership in the associations did not reflect outstanding achievements recognized in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No scholarly articles authored by the petitioner were submitted.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s roles in student orchestras did not substantiate her being at the top of her field.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Her performances were mainly as an orchestral member or in academic settings, not indicating sustained national or international acclaim.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence was provided to demonstrate a high salary compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The collaboration on the VCD did not show critical acclaim or significant sales.
Supporting Documentation
[List of supporting documents and summary]
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed. The petitioner did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that she is an individual of extraordinary ability.
Reasoning:
The petitioner’s achievements, primarily as a student, did not meet the high threshold of sustained national or international acclaim or demonstrate that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of her achievements and contributions to her field before reapplying.
