Date of Decision: March 1, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Visual Effects Artist
Field: Visual Effects for Film, Television, and Video Games
Nationality: [Not specified in provided document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published materials in major media:
The Petitioner demonstrated that articles about his work were published in major Indonesian newspapers, Kompas and The Jakarta Post, which are considered major media in the Indonesian market.
Criteria Not Met:
Original contributions of major significance:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his contributions were of major significance in the field. While recommendation letters praised his skills and work, they did not specifically identify his contributions as having significant impact or influence on the field.
Display of work in artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The Petitioner did not submit evidence showing that his work was featured in artistic exhibitions or showcases. The provided recommendation letters did not satisfy this criterion.
Leading or critical roles for organizations with a distinguished reputation:
The Petitioner did not demonstrate how his role as a 3D Generalist/Scene Assembler at his company was critical to the overall outcome of the organization’s activities. Despite positive statements from supervisors, the evidence did not establish the Petitioner’s role as critical within the meaning of the regulation.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration:
Although the Petitioner’s salary was competitive, it was not shown to be significantly high in relation to others in the field. The Petitioner did not submit requested evidence of his actual earnings.
Commercial success in the performing arts:
The Petitioner did not provide comparative box office receipts or sales data to establish his commercial success in the performing arts. Being credited for commercially successful projects was not sufficient to meet this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not win any major internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner provided articles from major Indonesian media outlets that discussed his work, which met the criterion for published materials in major media.
Key quotes or references:
“The articles are about the Petitioner and relating to his work in the field, include the required title, date and author of the material, and are accompanied by sufficient supporting evidence to establish that these publications qualify as major media in the Indonesian market.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his contributions were of major significance in the field.
Key quotes or references:
“While the letters generally acknowledged the Petitioner’s participation in high profile projects, they do not contain specific, detailed information identifying his original contributions and explaining the unusual influence his work has had on the overall field.”
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings:
Not applicable to this case.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings:
Not applicable to this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings:
Not applicable to this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner’s role as a 3D Generalist/Scene Assembler was not demonstrated to be critical to his organization’s overall success.
Key quotes or references:
“The details provided in their statements do not demonstrate how his individual or team contributions to his assigned projects have been of significant importance to the outcome of the organization’s activities to the extent that his role is critical.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not submit evidence that his work was displayed in artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence that his salary was significantly high compared to others in his field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings:
The Petitioner did not submit comparative box office receipts or sales data to establish commercial success in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
Published Materials:
Articles from Kompas and The Jakarta Post discussing the Petitioner’s work.
Recommendation Letters:
Letters from former professors and supervisors praising the Petitioner’s skills and contributions.
Salary Offer Letter:
Offer letter from the Petitioner’s employer indicating a competitive salary.
IRS Forms W-2:
Submitted on appeal to confirm actual earnings.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed. The Petitioner does not qualify for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements by failing to satisfy at least three of the ten criteria. Although he provided evidence for some criteria, it was insufficient to establish the required level of acclaim and recognition in his field.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of his achievements and contributions or exploring other visa categories that might be more suitable for his qualifications and career trajectory.
