Date of Decision: July 18, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Singer
Field: Pop and R&B Music
Nationality: South African, Australian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner claimed to meet five regulatory criteria but satisfied only one.
Criteria Met:
- Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- The petitioner provided evidence of performances at recognized showcases and artistic exhibitions.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
- Submitted evidence included a gold record and participation in competitions such as the World Championships of Performing Arts (WCOPA).
- The AAO concluded the awards were not for excellence in the field but for popularity or participation, failing to meet the regulatory requirements.
- Published Material About the Petitioner:
- The petitioner submitted online articles and promotional materials, which lacked evidence of publication in major trade or professional media.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Claims of contributions, such as innovative music techniques, were unsupported by evidence of widespread adoption or industry impact.
- Leading or Critical Role:
- The petitioner claimed critical roles in tours and events, but these were not demonstrated to be with distinguished organizations or establishments. Letters and promotional materials failed to substantiate the critical nature of the petitioner’s involvement.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards:
The petitioner’s gold record was awarded for sales milestones rather than recognition of excellence in the field. Other awards lacked evidence of national or international recognition.
Published Material:
Submitted materials, including promotional articles, were insufficient to meet evidentiary standards due to lack of prominence or documentation of widespread recognition.
Original Contributions:
The petitioner’s claimed contributions to music were not substantiated by external evidence of industry-wide impact or significance.
Leading or Critical Role:
Evidence of participation in tours and performances did not establish leadership or critical roles with distinguished organizations.
Final Merits Determination Not Reached:
The AAO did not conduct a final merits determination, as the petitioner failed to meet the required minimum of three regulatory criteria.
Supporting Documentation
Awards Evidence: Provided but insufficient to establish recognition of excellence.
Published Articles: Included promotional materials that did not meet standards for major trade publications.
Contribution Evidence: Claims lacked corroboration of major significance in the music industry.
Performance Evidence: Participation in recognized showcases but insufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met only one regulatory criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field.
