dismissed EB-1A Case: Acting

identlftrlng data delekd to 
pmvent darIy unwarranted 
invasion of mrsoml ~rlvarv 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PUBLIC COPY fi 3 
FILE: WAC 03 152 52745 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: OCI 2 1 2a15 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
q Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, California Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrati& Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in the 
arts. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international 
acclaim requisite to classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are aliens 
described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with Extraordinary Ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's &try into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained national or international 
acclaim" that the statute requires. 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). An alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a "one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized 
award)." Id. Absent such an awqd, an alien can establish the necessary sustained acclaim by meeting at least 
three of ten other regulatory criteria., Id. However, the weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(4), must depend on the extent to which such evidence 
demonstrates, reflects, or is consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the 
alien's field of endeavor. A lower evidentiary standard would not be consiitent with the regulatory definition 
of "extraordinary ability" as "a level of expertise indicating that the indivjdual is one of that small percentage 
who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. $204;-5(h)(2). 
/' 
In ths case, the petitioner seeks classification as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts as an actor. The 
petitioner initially submitted numerous supporting documents and subsequentiy submitted additional materials 
in response to the director's Request for Evidence (RFE). On appeal, counbel submits a brief. Counsel's 
contentions do not overcome the deficiencies of the petition and the appeal will be dismissed. We address the 
evidence submitted and counsel's claims in the following discussion of the regulatory criteria relevant to the 
petitioner's case. 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 3 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards 
for excellence in theJield of endeavo-r. 
The petitioner initially submitted evidence that several television productions in which he performed had won or 
been nominated for various awards, but no evidence that he had individually won any awards or prizes for his 
acting. In his RFE response, the petitioner submitted a copy of an entry form for the 25th Annual Genie Awards 
- Dramatic Theatrical Feature-Length Films on which his name is handwritten along with four other actors. A 
handwritten note on the bottom of this document reads, "2005 Genie Award Nomination." As the director 
noted, the record contains no corroborative evidence of the petitioner's official nomination. Even if his 
nomination was adequately documented, it would not meet this criterion for two reasons. First, a nomination for 
an award is not equivalent to actual receipt of an award. Second, the petitioner's alleged nomination took place 
in 2005, two years after his petition was filed, and consequently cannot be considered. The petitioner must 
establish eligibility at the time of filing; a petition cannot be approved at a future date after the petitioner 
becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See 8 C.F.R.'§ 103.2@)(12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45,49 
(Comrn. 1971). Accordingly, the petitioner does not deet this criterion. 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership irt associations in the field for which classiJication is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international 
experts in their disciplines orfieldr. 
The petitioner did not initially claim eligibility under this criterion. With the RFE response, counsel submitted 
and cited a letter evidencing the petitioner's membership in ACTRA. The letter identifies ACTRA as "the 
professional national organization of approximately 20,000 Canadian performers worlung sn the English- 
language recorded media: Film, Television, Video, Commercials and all other recorded media. ACTRA is 
affiliated with the Canadian Labour Congress and the International Federation of Actors." The letter verifies 
that the petitioner has been a "full member" of ACTRA since 2001, but it does not state that outstanding 
achievements are prerequisite to full ACTRA membership. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this 
criterion. 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or majo~ trade publications or other major media, 
relating to the alien 3 work in the field for which classzj?cation is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The record contains several articles that mention.or discuss the petitioner's work, but the record does not 
demonstrate that these articles were printed in major media. An article printed on April 14, 2002 in the 
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette discusses the "MythQuest" series and identifies the petitioner as a co-star. An interview 
with the petitioner about his work on "MythQuest" is contained in a printout from the website of the Calgary 
Public Library and dated April 18, 2002. The petitioner is also featured in an article entitled "Myth Quest 
Entertains Whole Family," published in the August 22, 2001 edition of Bowdens TV Week Halifax. The 
submitted copy indicates that this publication is a magazine from Halifax, Nova Scotia with a circulation of 
116,393. A review of the film "Get Over It," from the submitted excerpt of the July 19,2001 online edition of 
Jigsaw Lounge, briefly praises the petitioner's "small role" in one sentence. A column from the May 17-23, 
2002 edition of the Vancouver Sun TV Times section answers a reader's question about the petitioner's work. 
The record also contains an interview with the petitioner published in 2002 in GoBig, which counsel identifies 
as "Canada's leading arts and entertainment magazine." The record contains no evidence regarding the alleged 
prominence of GoBig. Without documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 4 
satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported assertions sf counsel do not constitute evidence. 
Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); 
Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503,506 (BIA 1980). The re~ord contains no evidence that any of the 
above mentioned publications are circulated throughout Canada or otherwise constitute major media. 
The petitioner submitted one black and white and one color copy of an article entitled "The Wamback Story" 
that contain a photograph of the petitioner in a co-starring role. We cannot determine if ths article is about the 
petitioner's work because the text of the article is illegible-in both of the submitted copies. An article from the 
Globe and Mail entitled "Auditions for All" contains a photograph of the petitioner, but the submitted copy cuts 
off the two paragraphs of the article's text which apparently discuss the petitioner. A second Globe and Mail 
article favorably reviews the petitioner's theatrical performance, but the submitted copy obstructs a portion of 
the text with a photograph of the petitioner and does not include a second photograph of the petitioner that is 
referenced in the first photograph's caption. Without full, legible copies of these articles, we cannot determine 
if they satisfy this criterion. In addition, both Globe and Mail articles were published in 1998, five years before 
ths petition was filed, and do not reflect sustained acclaim. Finally, a printout dated January 5, 2002 from the 
website of the Canadian Broadcasting Company quotes the petitioner concerning his role and experiences in 
filming, "Canada: A People's History." Promotional material from a television company's own website, such 
as this printout, does not meet this criterion. 
The record establishes that only three articles that mention or discuss the petitioner's work were published in 
professional, major trade publications or other'major media. An undated article entitled "Stuck in the Past" 
published in the Starweek magazine of the Toronto Star discusses "MythQuest," includes a photograph of the 
petitioner, and simply states, "Newcomer Christopher Jacot co-stars." A three-paragraph article entitled 
"Mythical Man" from the May 25-3 1, 2002 edition of the Canadian TV Guide features a ghotograph of the 
petitioner and discusses his work on "MythQuest." An article entitled "Down by the Bays" published in the 
February 3,2003 edition of Maclean 's briefly praises the petitioner& performance in the film "The Bay of Love 
and Sorrows:" "Jacot is like a walking firecracker." Although favorable, these three brief citations of the 
petitioner's work do not demonstrate the requisite sustained acclaim. With his RFE response, the petitioner 
submitted three additional articles that we cannot consider bccause they were published after the petition was 
filed. Again, the petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing. See 8 C.F.R. 4 103.2(b)(12), Katigbak, 
14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meefthis criterion. 
(iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others 
in the same or an alliedJield of speciJication for which cfasszjication is sought. 
The petitioner did not initially claim to meet this criterion. In her RFE response, counsel claims the petitioner 
meets this criterion because he was "asked to be on the jury for the 2004 Gemini Awards, Best Youth 
Performance." The record contains no evidence of the petitioner's invitation or actual service as a judge for this 
award. Again, without documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the 
petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Obaigbena, 19 
I&N Dec. at 534; Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1; Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. at 506. Consequently, 
the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of 
major signiJicance in the Jie1d.C * 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 5 
The petitioner did not initially claim eligibility under this criterion. In her RFE response, counsel claims the 
petitioner meets this criterion, but simply states:, "See Exhibit to the Petition and herein below." The petitioner 
submitted 13 support letters from televisi d with him. We 
cannot consider three of these letters (from ecause they state 
that they are recommending the petitioner based on collaborations that occurred after the petition was filed. 
Again, the petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing. See 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2@)(12), Katigbak, 14 
I&N Dec. at 49. While testimonials such as the remaining ten letters provide relevant information about an 
alien's experience and accomplishments, they cannot by thpmselves establish the alien's eligibility under this 
criterion because they do not demonstrate that the alien's wok is of major significance in his field beyond the 
limited number of individuals with whom he has worked directly. Even when written by independent experts, 
letters solicited by an alien in support of an immigration petition carry less weight than preexisting, independent 
evidence of major contributions that one would expect of an alien who has sustained national or international 
acclaim. Accordingly, we review the letters as they relate,.to other evidence of the petitioner's contributions. 
Tim Southman, a film and television director, praises the petitioner's performance in Southman's film, "The 
Bay of Love and Sorrows." Mr. states that the film received excellent reviews in Canada and the 
United Kingdom, "many of which single out Christopher's outstanding portrayal of the film's principal 
character 'Silver."' The record contains only one critical review of this film, the Maclean's article discussed 
above under the third criterion, which just briefly mentions the petitioner's performance. Mr. - 
"I am confident that [the petitioner] will make a remarkable contribution to world,cinema." 
the petitioner's co-star in "MythQuest," praises the petitioner's talent and abilities and 
'forward to seeing his rise in the industry." 
w 
, a theater and television 
writer, explains that he first interviewed the petitioner about his ro e in e p ay asy" in 2000, later profiled 
him for GoBig magazine, and has "no doubt that given the opportunity," the petitioner will join the ranks of 
Canadian actors who have become famous in the United States. Anna Stratton, a feature film producer who 
worked with the petitioner on "The Bay of Love and Sorraws," praises the petitioner's performance in that film 
and notes that he "is at ease on the stage, on film and on television. . . . It is rare for a young actor to have such 
range, confidence and willingness to continually stretch his abilities." Similar praise of the petitioner's talent 
and skills are found in the letters of and 
These letters attest to the petitioner's talent, accomplishments, and promise, but they do not 
specifically identi& any original contributions of major significance that he has already made to his field. 
The record contains no other evidence that the ~etitioner has made orignal and major contributions to his field. 
The media articles discussed above under the third criterion indicate that the petitioner has received only limited 
recognition of his work. The record contain! no critical reviews that substantively discuss any of the 
petitioner's individual performances or his career in depth. While the petitioner submitted evidence that he 
performed in award-winning productions, the record is devoid of any evidence that the petitioner has won any 
awards or other substantial critical acclaim for his individual performances. Accordingly, the petitioner does not 
meet ths criterion. 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in thejield at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
This criterion generally applies to the visual, not performing, arts. However, because counsel claimed that the 
petitioner meets this criterion and cited numerous documents in the record, we have considered the relevant 
materials as comparable evidence of the petitioner's eligbility pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(4). The record documents the petitioner's performance in "Easy" at the Theatre Viscera as part of 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 6 
the 2000 Toronto Fringe Theatre Festival ("Toronto Fringe"). An article from the December 28, 2000 online 
edition of Eye identifies the petitioner as a "rising star" for his performance in "Easy." The submitted printout 
&om the Toronto Fringe's website states that the Toronto Fringe is the thrd largest Fringe festival in Canada 
and embraces the "Fringe philosophy" of providing "all artists, emerging and established, with the opportunity 
to produce their play no matter the content, form or style, and to make the event as affordable and accessible as 
possible for the members of the community." This evidence indicates that the Toronto Fringe is a prominent 
and notable theatrical festival, but it does not demonstrate that the Toronto Fringe or the Theatre Viscera are 
critically acclaimed theatrical venues that enjoy prominence throughout Canada such that the petitioner's 
performance would reflect national acclaim. 
In her RFE response, counsel states that the film "The Bay of Love and Sorrows" was screened at the Montreal 
World Film Festival and the Atlantic Film Festival in Halifax, but the submitted printouts from these festivals' 
websites do not corroborate that statement nor do they establish the national or international significance of 
these festivals. Again, without documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not 
satisfjt the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. 
Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. at 534; Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1; Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. at 506. 
Moreover, the record contains only one brief favorable mention of the petitioner's performance in this film 
(from the aforementioned Maclean's article). The evidence thus does not establish that the petitioner performed 
in theatrical or film festivals or showcases in a manner consistent with the requisite sustained acclaim. 
Accordingly, he does not meet this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has peformed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments 
that have a distinguished reputation. 
The petitioner claims to meet ths criterion because he appeared in some episodes of three award-winning 
television series. The record shows that the appeared in two episodes of '"Twice in a Lifetime" in 
1999. This series won five awards between 2000 and 2002, but none are attributed to or mention the petitioner. 
The petitioner appeared in two episodes of "The Famous Jett Jackson" in 1998, but the only award allegedly 
won by this series was for the actress Keny Duff. Similarly, the petitioner allegedly made a guest appearance 
in "The Zack Files" in 2001, but the only awards allegedly won by this series were for sound mixing and another 
actor's performance. The record contains no evidence that any productions in which the petitioner played a 
leading or critical role received wide critical acclaim or were otherwise recognized for their distinguished 
reputations at the time this petition was filed. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salav or other signzj?cantly high remuneration for 
services, in relation to others in thefield. 
The record contains copies of the petitioner's contracts, October through December 2003 Canadian sales tax 
return, and income statements. In addition, the aforementioned letter from ACTRA states that the petitioner "is 
among the highest paid in our membership, has commanded top dollar for his acting services, and has been paid 
substantially above our union minimums." The record contains a table of the minimum ACTRA fees for actors 
and other performers for various time periods between 2004 and 2006, but no evidence of the minimum fees for 
the dates corresponding to the contracts submitted with the petition. In his RFE response, the petitioner 
submitted additional contracts that we cannot consider because they were signed after the petition was filed. 
The petitioner must establish eligbility at the time of filing. See 8 C.F.R. 3 103.20>)(12), Katigbak, 14 I&N 
Dec. at 49. In addition, the record contains no evidence of the salary or remuneration of top actors in Canada 
WAC 03 152 52745 
Page 7 
fi-om which we could determine whether or not the petitioner's documented compensation meets this criterion. 
The ACTRA letter does not provide examples of remuneration provided to leading Canadian actors and does not 
state whether it is uncommon for an actor to be compensated above the minimum rates. The record thus does 
not establish that, at the time of filing, the petitioner's' salary was significantly higher than other Canadian 
television and film actors or was comparable to such-actors at the very top of their field. Accordingly, the 
petitioner does not meet this criteriow 
(4 Evidence of commercial successes in the pe$orming arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
Ron Schmidt, a producer who worked with the petitioner on "Hellraiser: Hellworld," states, "I can attest to [the 
petitioner's] extraordinary contribution to this film and his part ensuring artistic and commercial success." Yet 
the record indicates that this film was released on video in 2004 and the submitted printout from IMDbpro 
regarding the "Hellraiser" series does not list any gross income f& "Hellraiser: Hellworld." The petitioner also 
submitted evidence of the box office gross earnings in the United States and the United Kingdom for the film 
"Get Over It," in which he played a minor supporting role. Yet the record contains no evidence that the stated 
income constitutes a commercial success in the film industry given the movie's reportedly $10,000,000 budget 
or that any commercial success was directly attributable to the petitioner's role in the film. On appeal, the 
petitioner submits evidence of the box office returns for the film "Going the Distance," in which he played a 
starring role. However, we cannot consider this evidence because the film was released after this petition was 
filed. Again, the petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing; a petition cannot be approved at a 
future date after the petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2@)(12), 
Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, he does not meet this criterion. 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 4 1153(b)(l)(A), 
only if the alien can establish extraordinary ability through extensive documentation of sustained national or 
international acclaim demonstrating that the alien has risen to the very top of his or her field. The evidence in 
this case indicates that the petitioner is a successful actor who has gained limited recognition in Canada. 
However, the record does not establish that the petitioner had achieved sustained national or international 
acclaim placing him at the very top of his field at the time of filing. He is thus ineligible for classification as an 
alien with extraordinary ability pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 11530>)(1)(A), and his 
petition may not be approved. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. 5 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
This decision is rendered without prejudice to the filing of a new petition under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Act with the requisite supporting evidence. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.