EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Screenwriter, Director, and Creative Producer – AUG202024_03B2203

Date of Decision: August 20, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Screenwriter, Director, and Creative Producer
Field: Entertainment Industry
Nationality: Not specified in the document

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

The petitioner claimed eligibility under several regulatory criteria, but while three were met, the totality of evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the very top of the field.

Criteria Met:

1. Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
   • The petitioner received a national award in 2008 for screenwriting, equivalent to an Emmy in Russia.
2. Published Material About the Petitioner:
   • Media coverage in prominent Russian publications discussed his documentary and music video projects.
3. Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
   • The petitioner served as a jury member for several film festivals and a long-running comedy competition.

Criteria Not Fully Met:

1. Original Contributions of Major Significance:
   • The petitioner claimed contributions to films, documentaries, and music videos. However, evidence did not demonstrate significant industry-wide impact.
2. Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
   • While the petitioner’s work was displayed, documentation did not establish that it garnered acclaim placing him at the top of his field.
3. Performance in a Leading or Critical Role:
   • The petitioner held roles in various projects, but the number and significance of these roles were limited compared to peers in the industry.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Recognition:

• The petitioner’s 2008 national award was acknowledged as significant. However, the lack of subsequent awards or sustained achievements in the years following the award weakened the claim of extraordinary ability.

Judging Activities:

• Jury roles at film festivals and television competitions demonstrated expertise but lacked corroborating evidence, such as criteria for selection.

Published Material:

• Media articles highlighted the petitioner’s projects but focused primarily on the content rather than his individual achievements.

Director’s and AAO’s Determination:

• The AAO upheld the Director’s decision, stating that while the petitioner met three criteria, the totality of evidence did not support sustained national or international acclaim as required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).

Supporting Documentation

Awards Evidence: Documentation of a 2008 national award for screenwriting.
Judging Evidence: Records of jury roles in film festivals and television competitions.
Published Material: Articles in Russian media about the petitioner’s documentary and music video projects.
Contribution Evidence: Letters and documents highlighting roles in projects, lacking evidence of significant field-wide impact.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
While the petitioner met three regulatory criteria, the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the entertainment industry.

Download The Full Petition Review Here