Date of Decision: January 22, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Spanish Language Specialist and Teacher
Field: Education
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None of the initial evidentiary criteria were satisfied by the Petitioner.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: The petitioner failed to satisfy the requirement of providing evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.
Criterion 2: There was no documentation of significant achievements in the field of education that were recognized nationally or internationally.
Criterion 3: The petitioner did not meet the criteria of producing scholarly articles in professional journals or other major media.
Criterion 4: There was no evidence provided to show participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization.
Criterion 5: The petitioner did not demonstrate membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members.
Criterion 6: There was no proof of original contributions of major significance in the field.
Criterion 7: The petitioner did not present evidence of performing in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation.
Criterion 8: There was no evidence of commanding a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
There were no significant national or international awards or prizes won by the petitioner, as required for demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The decision noted the absence of materials published about the petitioner in major media or professional publications, which is crucial for establishing recognition in the field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner failed to provide evidence of original contributions that have significantly impacted the field of education.
Participation as a Judge:
No evidence was submitted to show the petitioner’s participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not demonstrate membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members, which is necessary for the EB1 classification.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The decision noted a lack of scholarly articles published by the petitioner in professional journals or other major media.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
There was no proof that the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not present evidence of commanding a high salary or other significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted a letter on motion but failed to address the basis for prior decisions. The letter did not assert new facts to be proved or cite binding precedent decisions or other legal authority establishing errors in the application of law or USCIS policy.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider were both denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not satisfy the requirements for reopening the proceeding with new facts or for reconsideration based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The prior decisions were deemed correct based on the evidence of record.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner gather substantial and compelling new evidence if considering another appeal.
Consulting with an immigration attorney who specializes in EB1 petitions might provide better insights and increase the chances of future success.
