Date of Decision: January 29, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Senior User Experience (UX) Designer
Field: User Experience and Interface Design
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards:
The petitioner provided evidence of receiving several awards, such as a silver award for a health services communication medium.
Leading or critical role for organizations that have a distinguished reputation:
The petitioner was employed as a UI/UX Lead Designer, indicating a significant role in a distinguished organization.
Criteria Not Met:
Published materials in professional or major trade publications or other major media:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that there were significant published materials about her in major trade publications or media.
Display of her work at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that her work was publicly credited or attributed to her in an exhibition or showcase.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration in relation to others in the field:
The petitioner’s salary data did not provide a clear comparison of her earnings in relation to others in the UX/UI design field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner received a silver award in 2011 and an Iron Award for her work in design. However, the documentation did not adequately prove that these awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
There was insufficient evidence to show that the petitioner’s work had been significantly covered by major trade publications or media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not applicable as this criterion was not claimed or documented by the petitioner.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable as this criterion was not claimed or documented by the petitioner.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not claim or provide evidence for membership in associations that require outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable as this criterion was not claimed or documented by the petitioner.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner served as a UI/UX Lead Designer, indicating a leading role in a distinguished organization.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s salary was higher than average for graphic designers but did not provide sufficient comparative data specific to UX/UI designers.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable as this criterion was not relevant to the petitioner’s field.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Recommendation: Provided support but lacked detailed evidence of major significance.
Awards Documentation: Included certificates and descriptions but did not establish national or international recognition.
Salary Data: Provided comparative wage data but did not adequately relate to the specific field of UX/UI design.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the initial requirement of satisfying at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability.
The evidence provided did not establish the necessary level of sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the top of the field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering additional, more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability and recognition.
Consulting with an immigration attorney to better document and present qualifications could improve future petitions.
