Date of Decision: NOV 7, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Restaurant
Field: Culinary Arts
Nationality: [Not provided in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner provided evidence of serving as a judge for a nationwide contest, “Personality of the Year 2013,” where he judged categories related to culinary arts. This fulfills the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of Lesser Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner submitted awards for “Personality of the Year 2011” and “Professional of the Year 2013.” These awards were deemed regional and not recognized nationally or internationally for excellence in the field, failing the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i).
Membership in Associations: The evidence did not demonstrate that the memberships in culinary associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts, thus not meeting the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii).
Published Material About the Petitioner: The articles submitted were from regional newspapers and did not meet the requirements for publication in major media or identify the author as required. This did not fulfill the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s contributions in the culinary field had a major impact. This failed to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Findings: The Petitioner’s awards were regional and did not demonstrate national or international recognition for excellence in the field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Findings: The articles were from regional newspapers and did not meet the requirements for major media publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Findings: The Petitioner’s contributions in the culinary arts, while innovative, did not show evidence of major significance or widespread implementation in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Findings: The Petitioner judged culinary categories in the “Personality of the Year” contest, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Findings: The memberships provided did not require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Reviews: Various articles and reviews about the Petitioner’s achievements in culinary arts.
Recommendation Letters: Letters from colleagues and experts supporting the significance and impact of the Petitioner’s contributions to the culinary field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time major achievement or at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability. The evidence presented did not establish the Petitioner’s sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage who have risen to the very top of his field.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more robust evidence of his contributions’ significance and potentially reapplying if additional substantial evidence can be presented. Consulting with an immigration attorney for further guidance and preparation may also be beneficial.
