Date of Decision: January 26, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Professional Model
Field: Modeling
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner provided evidence of participation as a judge on a panel for a Nigerian modeling agency’s auditions. This criterion was met with supporting documentation, including an advertisement listing her as a panel member and a letter of appreciation from the agency.
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards for Excellence: The Petitioner claimed several pageant titles, but did not provide sufficient information about the events or the recognition of these awards. The photographs and limited descriptions failed to demonstrate the national or international recognition of the awards.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The Petitioner presented several articles and web-based content about her achievements. However, she did not sufficiently demonstrate that these publications are professional or major trade publications or other major media. The lack of independent corroboration regarding the reach and significance of the publications led to this criterion not being met.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The Petitioner claimed to have won several pageant titles, but the evidence provided was not sufficient to establish the awards’ national or international recognition. The supporting materials did not adequately address the reputation of the awards or provide detailed information on the awarding entities and selection processes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The Petitioner included articles from various sources, but did not substantiate that these sources are recognized major media. Additionally, the content from platforms like Wikipedia was not considered reliable due to its user-edited nature, and the petitioner failed to provide independent verification of the publications’ credibility.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner’s role as a judge for a modeling agency’s auditions was documented and accepted as meeting one of the required criteria.
Membership in Associations: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not discussed or evidenced in the provided documents.
Supporting Documentation
Advertisement listing the Petitioner as a member of the audition panel for a Nigerian modeling agency.
Letter from the modeling agency thanking the Petitioner for her participation as a judge.
Various photographs of the Petitioner with pageant titles and awards.
Articles and web-based content about the Petitioner’s achievements.
Wikipedia excerpts and self-promotional claims from the publications’ websites.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence criteria and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition in her field.
Reasoning: The Petitioner’s documentation was insufficient to establish the recognition and significance of her awards and publications. The evidence provided did not meet the regulatory standards for proving extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial and verifiable evidence of her achievements and recognition in the field. She should focus on obtaining documentation that meets the specific requirements outlined in the regulatory criteria.
