Date of Decision: March 30, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Writer and Consultant on Occupational Safety and Mediation
Field: Occupational Safety and Mediation
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Judging the Work of Others: The Petitioner met this criterion by serving on the jury for the 2016 awards and on an “External Jury for the presentation and defense” of master’s theses at a university in Venezuela.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner claimed to have received awards from the Corporation and Foundation “for her Bright Career as National and International Labor Law Writer” and “Best Writer in the Law Area.” However, the evidence did not establish the national or international recognition of these awards. The promotional statements about the awards’ significance by the awarding entities were insufficient to demonstrate their national or international recognition.
Published Material in Major Media: The Petitioner provided several articles about her work, but these articles were published after the petition’s filing date and shared similar content and tone, indicating they were likely derived from a press release. Additionally, the Petitioner did not submit evidence that the articles were from professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner provided letters and documentation indicating contributions to mediation and occupational health. However, the evidence did not demonstrate the major significance of these contributions. The letters lacked detailed information on how the Petitioner’s work led to significant and widespread improvements in occupational safety and mediation.
Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations: The Petitioner claimed leading roles in various organizations. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these organizations have distinguished reputations or that the Petitioner’s roles were critical to their success. The letters and documentation provided did not offer specific, detailed information explaining how the Petitioner’s role was critical.
Membership in Associations: On appeal, the Petitioner claimed membership in associations that require outstanding achievements for membership. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that the associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that she personally received nationally or internationally recognized awards. The promotional statements about the awards’ significance by the awarding entities were insufficient to demonstrate their national or international recognition.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that published materials about her were in major trade or professional publications or other major media. The articles provided were published after the petition’s filing date and shared similar content and tone, indicating they were likely derived from a press release.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The letters lacked specific details on how the contributions significantly influenced the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner served on the jury for awards and on an “External Jury for the presentation and defense” of master’s theses, satisfying this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that her books were scholarly articles. The evidence did not demonstrate the scholarly nature or editorial control of the publications.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that she performed leading or critical roles for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner withdrew her claim regarding artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that her remuneration was high in relation to others in her field. The evidence provided did not show the specific source(s) of the Petitioner’s remuneration or offer a basis for comparison.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met one criterion but did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
