Date of Decision: FEB. 17, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
- Profession: Visual Effects Artist and Animator
- Field: Computer Graphics, Visual Effects, and Animation
- Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
- Initial Decision: Denied
- Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Documentation of Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The Petitioner submitted evidence of being a finalist at the Annual Shorty Awards and receiving a Silver at the 2018 Marketing Awards.
Evidence of Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The Petitioner provided evidence of their work on advertising campaigns for well-known brands, which appeared on television and other video media.
Evidence of High Salary or Other Significantly High Remuneration for Services:
The Petitioner submitted IRS Forms W-2, earnings statements, a letter from a company president, and commercial and governmental salary surveys, indicating a high level of remuneration.
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of Major, Internationally Recognized Award:
The Petitioner did not claim or establish receipt of a major, internationally recognized award.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Membership in Associations:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Leading or Critical Role in Organizations or Establishments:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not explicitly detailed in the decision.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner was a finalist in the Annual Shorty Awards and received a Silver at the 2018 Marketing Awards.
The Director’s initial assessment incorrectly evaluated the nature and significance of these awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Participation as a Judge:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Membership in Associations:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The Petitioner’s work in advertising campaigns was initially misclassified by the Director, as these campaigns were valid showcases of the Petitioner’s visual work.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Director’s analysis was flawed due to incorrect assumptions about the Petitioner’s annual salary calculations.
The appeal review highlighted more reliable evidence such as IRS forms and earnings statements showing high remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not specifically discussed in the appeal review.
Supporting Documentation
Annual Shorty Awards Finalist:
Pages from the organization’s website listing the Petitioner as a CG artist.
2018 Marketing Awards Silver Recipient:
Pages from the organization’s website listing the Petitioner as a CG artist.
IRS Forms W-2 and Earnings Statements:
Documents showing the Petitioner’s earnings and salary projections.
Letter from Company President:
Provided projections of the Petitioner’s income and validation of his role and contributions.
Salary Surveys:
Comparative data showing the Petitioner’s high salary relative to peers in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Director’s initial decision is withdrawn, and the case is remanded for a new decision.
Reasoning:
The appeal review found errors in the Director’s evaluation of the evidence, particularly regarding the awards, display of work, and remuneration criteria.
The Director must re-evaluate the evidence under the correct standards and consider the totality of the Petitioner’s achievements.
Next Steps:
The Director should reassess the Petitioner’s eligibility by accurately applying the regulatory criteria.
The Petitioner may need to provide additional evidence or clarification as requested by the Director during the remand process.
