EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Voice Over Artist from Mexico – JAN022019_03B2203

Date of Decision: January 2, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Voice Over Artist
Field: Multilingual Voice Over
Nationality: Mexico

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

Awards:
The Petitioner established that he met this criterion by providing documentation of his role in award-winning campaigns. Although he was not the named recipient of the awards, evidence showed that his contributions were integral to the success of the projects, thus allowing him to be considered a recipient of the awards.

Criteria Not Met:

Published Material:
The evidence provided did not meet the criterion as the articles and interviews about the Petitioner were either not published in professional or major trade publications or were published after the filing of the petition. The Petitioner could not establish the circulation and significance of the publications cited.

Leading or Critical Role:
The Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence showing that his contributions were of significant importance to the outcome of the organizations’ activities. Although letters from associates praised his work, they did not demonstrate the impact or distinguished reputation of the organizations he worked with.

High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner provided his annual income but did not corroborate it with sufficient evidence. The figures did not establish that his salary was significantly high relative to others in the field, and the sources of his income were not adequately documented.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won

The Petitioner was involved in award-winning campaigns, but he was not named as a recipient. His role was recognized as integral by his peers, which allowed him to meet this criterion.

Published Materials About the Petitioner

The articles and interviews provided did not qualify as they were not from major trade publications or were published after the petition filing. The circulation details and target audience of the publications were not sufficiently documented.

Original Contributions of Major Significance

The Petitioner did not meet this criterion as the evidence did not convincingly demonstrate the significance and impact of his contributions on the field or the organizations he worked with.

Participation as a Judge

No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.

Membership in Associations

No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles

No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.

Leading or Critical Role Performed

The Petitioner’s contributions were recognized by his peers, but the evidence did not establish that his roles were critical to the organizations’ distinguished activities or outcomes.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases

No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration

The Petitioner’s salary did not sufficiently demonstrate that it was significantly high relative to others in the field. The provided income figures lacked corroborating documentation.

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts

No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.

Supporting Documentation

  • Letters from colleagues and industry professionals praising the Petitioner’s contributions and involvement in successful campaigns.
  • Financial documents and invoices outlining the Petitioner’s earnings over several years.
  • Articles and interview transcripts about the Petitioner’s work.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten required criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability. The documentation did not adequately establish the significance, recognition, and impact of his contributions in the field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more comprehensive evidence that meets the required criteria before reapplying or exploring alternative immigration options.

Download the Full Petition Review Here

Igbo Stanford
Igbo Stanford

AI enthusiast, writer, and web designer.

Articles: 682

Leave a Reply

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