Date of Decision: August 12, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Writer and Author
Field: Literary Non-Fiction and Business/Commercial Writing
Nationality: Not Provided in Document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None: Upon review, the Director’s findings on the criteria met were not sustained on appeal.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations: The petitioner claimed membership in The Federation of Hong Kong Writers (TFHKW). However, the evidence provided did not demonstrate that the association requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published Material: The petitioner submitted various online articles. However, these did not meet the regulatory requirements as they were not from professional or major trade publications or other major media. The specific media and authors of the articles were not adequately documented.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Not evaluated due to failure to meet the initial three criteria.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not evaluated due to failure to meet the initial three criteria.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable, as no specific awards or prizes were discussed.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided several online articles. However, these articles were not from professional or major trade publications or other major media, and the specific web pages where the articles appeared did not provide sufficient information to qualify them under this criterion. Additionally, some articles did not identify the author, which is a regulatory requirement.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner claimed to meet this criterion but did not provide sufficient evidence to support it. Therefore, this claim was not evaluated as the petitioner did not meet the initial requirement of at least three criteria.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable, as there was no evidence provided for this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner claimed membership in TFHKW but did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable, as the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to support this claim and it was not evaluated due to failure to meet the initial three criteria.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not applicable, as the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to support this claim and it was not evaluated due to failure to meet the initial three criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable, as the petitioner’s field does not involve artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable, as no evidence of high salary or remuneration was discussed.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable, as the petitioner’s field does not involve commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
Reference Letters: Provided letters from TFHKW representatives and other professionals recognizing the petitioner’s roles and contributions. However, these letters were insufficient to establish the petitioner’s eligibility under the claimed criteria.
Published Articles: Included several online articles, many of which were found to be insufficiently supported by the necessary details or lacked independent verification.
Financial Documents: Not applicable, as no financial documents were discussed in relation to high salary or remuneration.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidentiary criteria and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition in her field. The evidence provided was found to be insufficient to establish her eligibility for the EB1 classification.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more comprehensive and corroborative evidence to support her claims, focusing on independent recognition and demonstrating how her work has had a significant impact on her field.
