EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Television Producer – JUN112024_02B2203

Date of Decision: June 11, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Television Producer
Field: Media Production
Nationality: Not specified in the document

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Claimed:
The petitioner claimed to meet seven criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii)–(viii). The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) determined the petitioner failed to satisfy at least three criteria as required.

  1. Membership in Associations:
    • The petitioner’s membership in the Union of Journalists of the Republic of Kazakhstan did not meet the regulatory standard of requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
  2. Published Material About the Petitioner:
    • Articles provided were published after the petition filing date and lacked evidence of circulation data or prominence as major trade publications.
  3. Judging the Work of Others:
    • Evidence of judging activities occurred after the filing date and did not demonstrate formal designation or relevance to the claimed field.
  4. Original Contributions of Major Significance:
    • Letters from colleagues praised the petitioner’s contributions but failed to establish their major significance in the field.
  5. Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
    • Claimed contributions included published interviews and non-academic materials that did not qualify as scholarly articles.
  6. Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions:
    • This criterion was introduced for the first time on appeal and was not addressed during prior filings, rendering it inadmissible.
  7. Leading or Critical Role:
    • The petitioner claimed to have held a critical role in production companies but failed to substantiate the organizations’ distinguished reputations or the impact of her roles.

Key Points from the Decision

Procedural Issues:
Evidence introduced after the petition filing date or first introduced on appeal was deemed inadmissible under USCIS procedural guidelines.

Evaluation of Contributions:
The petitioner’s work was noted as valuable within her organization but lacked evidence of major significance at a national or international level.

Membership and Judging Activities:
The claimed memberships and judging roles did not satisfy the evidentiary requirements due to insufficient documentation of prominence and timing issues.

Supporting Documentation

Membership Evidence: Membership in professional organizations lacked evidence of requiring outstanding achievements.
Published Material: Articles submitted lacked prominence and relevance under the EB-1 framework.
Expert Letters: Generalized and insufficient to establish major significance of contributions.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not demonstrate eligibility by meeting at least three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The AAO found that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the top of her field.

Download The Full Petition Review Here

Emmanuel Uwakwe
Emmanuel Uwakwe

I studied Electrical and Electronics Engineering and have a huge passion for tech related stuff :)

Articles: 1543

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *