Date of Decision: FEB. 24, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Visual Artist and Designer
Field: Visual Arts and Design
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Published Material: The petitioner provided about a dozen articles spanning from 2005 to 2018. Half of these articles showcased the petitioner’s work and contributions, while the remaining articles mentioned the petitioner in the context of various art exhibits.
Artistic Display: The petitioner participated in 20 collective exhibitions and 12 individual exhibitions primarily in Venezuela, with some in Florida and California from 2001 to 2019.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner co-owns an architecture company with significant projects and awards. However, the role did not demonstrate national or international recognition at the very top of the field.
Criteria Not Met
Sustained National or International Acclaim: The evidence did not show sustained national or international acclaim necessary for this classification. The limited media coverage and exhibition history did not establish the petitioner’s recognition among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Awards and Prizes: Although the petitioner’s company received various awards, there was no evidence of the petitioner receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards for individual excellence.
Significance of Exhibitions: The petitioner did not provide evidence of the significance of exhibitions, such as critical praise, notable attendance, or influential contributions to the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The petitioner’s company received awards for architectural projects, but there was no evidence of individual awards recognizing the petitioner’s personal achievements.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The published materials, mainly post-2005, did not demonstrate sustained acclaim. The coverage did not reference the petitioner as a nationally or internationally acclaimed artist.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner’s contributions were noted but did not garner national or international recognition, nor did they place the petitioner at the very top of the field.
Participation as a Judge
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
While the petitioner held a leading role in his architecture company, this did not translate to sustained acclaim in the visual arts field.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
The petitioner’s exhibitions did not show a high level of recognition or sustained acclaim necessary for EB1 classification.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Articles (2005-2018): Showcased work and exhibitions.
Exhibition Records: Details of 20 collective and 12 individual exhibitions.
Company Awards: Recognition of architectural projects.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition at the very top of the field of endeavor. The evidence did not establish eligibility under the highly restrictive criteria for EB1 classification.
Next Steps: It is recommended that the petitioner consider additional evidence or alternative immigration classifications if applicable.
