Date of Decision: March 11, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Soprano Saxophonist
Field: Music (Jazz)
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Published Material: The petitioner provided material about his work, but it did not meet the plain language of this criterion due to lack of evidence demonstrating that the publications were major media or professional trade publications.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner provided letters discussing his talent and creativity but failed to demonstrate specific examples of how his work impacted the jazz field.
- Performing in a Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner performed at notable venues but did not show that his role was leading or critical to the establishment’s success.
- Commercial Success in the Performing Arts: Although he performed and sold CDs, the petitioner did not provide specific sales figures or receipts.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards and Prizes: No evidence of receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards.
- Membership in Associations: No documented membership in associations in the field.
- Judging the Work of Others: No evidence of participation as a judge in the field.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: No documented evidence of authoring scholarly articles.
- Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Performances were not equated to exhibitions or showcases in the visual arts sense.
- High Salary or Remuneration: No evidence of high salary compared to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Findings: The articles provided did not meet the requirements as they lacked proper certification and supporting evidence to prove their credibility as major publications.
- Key Quotes: “The submission of a translation certification that does not specifically identify the document or documents it purportedly accompanies does not meet the requirements.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Findings: Letters provided discussed the petitioner’s skill but did not demonstrate the major impact of his work.
- Key Quotes: “An individual must have demonstrably impacted his field in order to meet this regulatory criterion.”
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Findings: No evidence was provided to show a high salary compared to peers.
- Key Quotes: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of Recommendation: Detailed the petitioner’s skills but lacked specific examples of major contributions.
- Articles and Media Coverage: Included several articles, but they were either not properly certified or did not meet the criterion for major media.
- Performance Evidence: Provided records of performances at notable venues but did not prove a leading or critical role.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet the required criteria for extraordinary ability. The evidence did not demonstrate that the petitioner’s achievements were of a level indicating that he is one of the small percentages who have risen to the top of his field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider submitting a motion to reopen or reconsider if new evidence or arguments are available within the allowed timeframe.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
