Date of Decision: May 27, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Singer and Songwriter
Field: Music
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Published Material About the Petitioner
The petitioner provided evidence of published material about his work in professional or major media, meeting this criterion.
Criterion 2: Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others
The petitioner provided evidence of his participation as a judge of the work of others in his field, fulfilling this criterion.
Criterion 3: Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner demonstrated that his original contributions in music, including his thirteen albums and live performances, were of major significance in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards
The petitioner claimed to have received two lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards but did not provide sufficient evidence to meet this criterion.
Criterion 2: Other Criteria (if applicable)
The petitioner did not sufficiently address other criteria beyond those analyzed by the Director and the appeals office.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner claimed to have received lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards but did not provide adequate evidence to support this claim.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided several articles and publications that featured his work, which met the criterion for published material about him in professional or major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s original contributions, including thirteen albums and live performances, were demonstrated to be of major significance in the field of music.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner met this criterion by providing evidence of his role as a judge in music competitions or evaluations.
Membership in Associations: Not applicable
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not applicable
Leading or Critical Role Performed: Not applicable
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: Not applicable
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner provided evidence of his commercial successes, including live performances and social media status, which supported his claims under other criteria.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Publications: Various articles and publications about the petitioner’s work.
Reference Letters: Letters from colleagues and associates detailing the petitioner’s contributions and roles.
Album Records: Documentation of the petitioner’s thirteen albums.
Performance Records: Evidence of live and televised performances.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision was remanded.
Reasoning:
The petitioner provided sufficient evidence to meet the criteria for published material, participation as a judge, and original contributions of major significance. The Director’s initial decision did not adequately evaluate all the evidence provided. The petitioner also needed to provide more evidence to support his claim of receiving lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards. The Director is to reconsider the evidence and make a new decision.
Next Steps:
The petitioner should provide additional evidence to support his claim of receiving lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards. He should also continue to document his ongoing work and contributions in the field of music to strengthen his case.
