Date of Decision: January 24, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Wood Carving Craftsman
Field: Woodcarving
Nationality: Uzbekistan
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner provided evidence of serving as a judge of the work of others in his field. This was the only criterion met according to the review.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Awards: The Petitioner cited awards such as the UNESCO Seal of Excellence and “Best Craftsman of the Year” from competitions in Uzbekistan. However, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that these awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
- Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in the Association of Artisans, Craftsmen, and Folkists of Uzbekistan. However, he did not provide evidence that the association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
- Published Material: The Petitioner submitted articles about his work but did not provide sufficient evidence that these were published in professional or major trade publications or other major media, nor did they meet the required criteria for published material.
- Original Contributions: The Petitioner provided letters of recommendation that praised his work but did not demonstrate that his contributions had a major significance in the field of woodcarving.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner claimed to have authored scholarly articles and a book, but these were not demonstrated to be scholarly works as defined in the academic arena. Additionally, there was no evidence provided that the publications were major media or professional publications.
- Artistic Exhibitions: The Petitioner listed various venues where his work was displayed but did not provide evidence that his work was actually displayed or that the displayed work was his own. Certificates and diplomas provided limited probative value.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The Petitioner presented awards such as the UNESCO Seal of Excellence and “Best Craftsman of the Year.” However, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate these awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Several articles were submitted, but they did not meet the criteria of being published in major media or professional or major trade publications. Inconsistencies in titles and authorship further diminished their value.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The Petitioner provided letters of praise, but these lacked specific examples and did not demonstrate how his contributions had significantly impacted the field.
Participation as a Judge
The Petitioner met the criteria for participating as a judge of the work of others in his field.
Membership in Associations
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that the associations he was a part of required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Petitioner’s articles and book were not shown to be scholarly works and were not published in major media or professional publications.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
The Petitioner failed to provide evidence that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases, and the documentation provided did not substantiate his claims.
Supporting Documentation
- UNESCO Seal of Excellence: Provided but not demonstrated as nationally or internationally recognized.
- Best Craftsman Awards: Provided but not substantiated with evidence of national or international recognition.
- Published Articles: Submitted but did not meet the criteria for major media or professional publications.
- Certificates of Participation: Provided but did not sufficiently demonstrate artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidence requirements of demonstrating extraordinary ability through certified documentation. The submitted evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider reapplying with properly certified translations and more robust documentation to meet the required evidentiary criteria.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
