dismissed EB-1A Case: Acting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19539561 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 16, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, an actor , seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability . See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )( 1 )(A) , 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(1 )(A). This first preference 
classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their extraordinary ability 
through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in 
their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that while the Petitioner 
established the initial evidence requirements by meeting at least three of the evidentiary criteria under 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) , the record did not establish that she possesses sustained national or 
international acclaim and is one of the very few at the top of her field . On appeal , the Petitioner asserts 
that the Director did not consider the totality of the record in making his decision. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner 's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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 entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States . 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204 .5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a pettt10ner can demonstrate 
international recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement (that 
is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, then 
he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten criteria 
listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material in certain 
media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) 
( discussing a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination); see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner has been working as an actress, primarily in theater productions but also in film, for 
more than a decade. She earned a Bachelor of Performing Arts from the I I 
Universitvl in 2010, and completed coursework towards a Bachelor of Fine Arts from 
I I University. The record includes a job offer letter from a company m 
Massachusetts to work as a media and broadcasting head. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that she has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, she must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director found that the Petitioner met three of the evidentiary 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), relating to published material about her in qualifying media, 
her participation as a judge of the work of others, and the display of her work in artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that she also meets two additional evidentiary criteria, 
those relating to a leading or critical role and commercial success in the performing arts. 1 After 
reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we agree with the Director that she has met the requisite 
three criteria, but also that the record does not establish that she qualifies as a noncitizen of 
extraordinary ability. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any 
necessa,y translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) 
1 The Petitioner does not reassert her claims to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii) or (vi) on appeal. We will 
therefore consider the evidence submitted in support of these criteria only as part of the final merits determination. 
2 
The record includes copies of several articles published in Nepali media which discuss or mention the 
Petitioner and her work in varying degrees. For purposes of this criterion, while published material 
need not be primarily or only about a petitioner to qualify, it cannot be solely about their employer or 
another organization with which they are associated. 6 USCJS Policy Manual at F.2, 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. Here, the Director listed the names of several publications 
which published articles that were included in the record, but did not identify specific articles which 
were about the Petitioner. After review, we conclude that at least two articles are about the Petitioner: 
an interview of her published in Nepali Times in its I 2013 edition, and a review of an 
adaptation of Shakespeare's I I in the I I 2014 edition of the 
Kathmandu Post. In addition, the record includes evidence which establishes that both of these 
publications are major media in Nepal. We therefore agree that the Petitioner meets this criterion. 
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 allied field of specialization for which 
class[fication is sought. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) 
To support her claim to meeting this criterion, the Petitioner submitted letters from the organizers of 
two theater festivals: the Theater Festival and thel I Theater Festival. This evidence 
is further supported by two articles posted on a website which indicate that she served as the head of 
the jury for the Theater Festival in 2012 and for the I I Theater Festival in 2010. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the evidence shows that she also served as a judge at the 
Theater Festival. However, the two letters from I I do not 
identify him as an organizer of this event, or as someone associated with an organization which 
organizes it, nor do they provide specific dates or even the year or edition of the event at which the 
Petitioner is claimed to have participated as a judge. Accordingly, we agree with the Director that the 
Petitioner meets this criterion based upon the evidence of her work at the 2012 I I Theater 
Festival and the 20101 I Theater Festival. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii) 
The Petitioner submitted evidence of her performance in numerous theater productions and movies as 
an actor, as well as in other roles including translator, director, and producer. However, we note that 
not every display of work by an artist takes place at an artistic exhibition or showcase, and it is the 
petitioner's burden to establish that a particular venue or event at which their work was displayed was 
an artistic exhibition or showcase. Id. Although the Petitioner has submitted evidence that she has 
performed as an actor in many theater productions and films, the evidence does not establish that the 
plays and films were shown at artistic exhibitions as opposed to shows presented for commercial 
purposes. 
Turning to her work as a movie director, the evidence shows that films she directed or produced were 
shown at film festivals including the 2020 Film Festival and the 201 I I I Film Festival. Because this evidence shows that those film festivals were artistic rather than 
commercial exhibitions of her work, we conclude that based upon this evidence the Petitioner meets 
this criterion. 
3 
As noted above, on appeal the Petitioner asserts that she also meets two additional criteria. However, 
because we have determined that she has met the requisite three criteria in order to meet the initial 
evidence requirements for this classification, we will not consider her claims to those criteria. Rather, 
we will review her arguments and the evidence submitted in their support as part of the totality of the 
evidence when conducting a final merits determination. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
In a final merits determination, we examine and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine 
whether the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small 
percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and that her achievements have been recognized in 
the field through extensive documentation. Here, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient evidence 
that he meets that standard. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's final merits determination focused on the evidence 
submitted for each criteria instead of considering the totality of the evidence to determine whether she 
had the requisite sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small percentage at the 
top of her field. In addition, she asserts that the Director did not give sufficient consideration to the 
many reference letters submitted on her behalf, and highlights phrases in some of the published 
material in the record. 
The record shows that after obtaining her performing arts degree in 2010, the Petitioner began an 
active period in Nepali theater and film before coming to the United States in 2015 to continue her 
education. Articles in Nepali publications and reference letters from colleagues and others in the 
Nepali theater and film sector confirm that she performed, and in many cases played a leading 
character, in several theater and film roductions during this period. For example, the article published 
in the Nepali Times in its 2013 edition is about the Petitioner and her portrayal of one of 
the characters in the play an adaptation of I The 
article notes that the production was created by ______ a group co-founded by the 
Petitioner, and describes it as "her show." Another article about the play, published in the Kathmandu 
Post a day earlier, mentions the Petitioner but focuses on the director, another co-founder of 
I And a letter from the program director of !Theater Nepal states that the 
play was staged at that venue for 30 days in 2013 and attracted full-house audiences. 
Another example of a performance by the Petitioner which received positive mention in major media 
was her role in I I covered in a review in the Nepali Times on I I 
2012. This play was also reviewed in the Kathmandu Post on the previous day, with the article noting 
that the Petitioner is one of the "well-known faces" in the performance. 
However, the evidence does not establish that her acting roles in other theater productions brought the 
Petitioner the same level of recognition as her role in these plays. The Petitioner asserts that her role 
in the Nepali adaptation ofl I was commercially successful, relying upon an article 
posted as a blog. While that article includes sections of reviews of the play that are claimed to have 
been published in major Nepali media, some of which mention the Petitioner, the full reviews are not 
4 
included in the record as published by those media, nor is there further information regarding the 
website where the blog was posted. Another article posted on a website, bishowkhabar.com, also 
mentions the Petitioner and her claimed high salary for her work as an actor inl I but 
as with the blog article, information about this website does not appear in the record to show that this 
is either a reliable or influential source of information. We also note that despite the claims of the 
Petitioner's commercial success (and high salary) which is largely based upon these articles, 
information about ticket sales for this show is not included in the record, nor is evidence of the 
Petitioner's income or how it relates to that of other actors in Nepal. In addition, a letter from one of 
the Petitioner's co-stars in this play I states only that "it is an established fact that all 
the artists involved in that play were paid the highest amount till date for a single production," but 
does not provide salary figures (his own or the Petitioner's) or refer to any documentation to support 
this claim. 
Regarding her acting roles in films, the Petitioner submitted articles posted to several websites that 
mention her as an actress in II I andl 12. The record also includes 
screen shots of movies on Y ouTube, and photographs of the Petitioner taken during the filming of 
these movies. However, although a reference letter froml I founder of a website focused 
on Nepali theater, states that the Petitioner "has had a very strong presence in Nepali film," the record 
does not support this statement. The articles mentioned above primarily list her amongst others as an 
actress in the film discussed, and the evidence does not show that she has received critical acclaim or 
commercial success at the national or international level for these roles. 
In addition to material published in Nepali media, the Petitioner also submitted evidence of an award 
she received to support her acclaim as an actress, for at the 2010 at the annuall I 
One Act Play Drama/Dance/Music and Instrumental Competition. In response to the Director's 
RFE, the Petitioner submitted a letter froml la journalist and co-founder of an 
Indian news website, in which he describes the history and competition rules for this competition. 
However,! I does not indicate that he is a member of the organization which sponsors the 
competition, the I IArtist Association, or otherwise explain the basis of his knowledge. More 
importantly, the evidence does not establish that this award is recognized as being prestigious in the 
field of acting at the national or international level, or otherwise brought acclaim to the Petitioner as 
an actress. We note that the most in-depth article about the Petitioner and her work, published in the 
Nepali Times onl 2013, does not mention her receipt of this award, nor does the record 
include evidence that the award is well publicized in major or arts media. 
The Petitioner also submitted evidence of her participation as a judge of other actors. Specifically, 
she submitted a letter from the organizer of the Theater Festival which states that she was a 
jury member for the festival, as well as an article from a website stating that she was the head of the 
jury for the first edition of this event in 2012. The evidence indicates that the festival was open to 
The Petitioner also participated as a jury member for the I I Theater 
Festival in 2010, which consisted of plays I I and was held in 
I I As with the evidence of the award received by the Petitioner, we note that the evidence 
does not show that either of these festivals received major media coverage, and it is therefore not 
apparent that the Petitioner garnered acclaim through her participation as a jury member. In addition, 
2 The record includes multiple alternate spellings of the title of this film. 
5 
she judged the performance of students and children, not professional actors, which reflects upon her 
perceived status in the acting field and the level of acclaim she has received for her work. 
In addition to the evidence of her work as an actor, the Petitioner also submitted evidence of havin 
performed other roles in theater productions and films. She directed the 
School's Theater Club in three plays: I and in 2014 and
I in 2015. Also, the evidence indicates that she translated and adapted productions for the 
Ne ali sta e, includin and Although her work onD 
_________ and ____ (in which she also acted, as noted above) received 
mention in major Nepali media, the evidence does not establish that her work directing secondary 
students led to acclaim or placed her as one of the small percentage of theater directors at the top of 
the field. 
The record also shows that the Petitioner served as a director in films. Specifically, she served as a 
castin director in the film I I a director of the short filml I 
and was a producer for the short film I I The latter two films were screened at the 
Film Festival in 2020 and the Film Festival in 2016, 
respectively. However, the record indicates that th festival was intended to highlight the 
work of local filmmakers, and the record does not demonstrate that either the I festival 
or another festival in I wherel lwas also screened received widespread media attention 
or were otherwise recognized in the film industry as prestigious or important festivals where the work 
of top filmmakers is displayed. Further, we note that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that either 
film was singled out for recognition among others displayed at those festivals. 
Another aspect of the Petitioner's work in Nepali theater is shown by her participation in related 
organizations. As previously noted, the evidence shows that she was a co-founder of I I a group which went on to stage theater productions in which she also performed and played 
other roles. While her role was no doubt leading or critical tol I the evidence does 
not demonstrate that her activities in this role laced her among the small percentage of actors at the 
top of her field. Her co-founder, _ explains that the group worked together from 2014 to 
20 l 7 and mentions the production of I and ________ He also states that 
the group "started the culture of freelancing artists in Nepal," but the record does not include evidence 
to support this statement. 
The Petitioner also points to evidence of her membership inl I Theater on appeal, as shown by a 
letter froml I president of the organization. I lists some of the theater 
productions that the Petitioner was involved in, but does not indicate which of these were done as a 
part of I Theater. In addition, evidence of some of the productions mentioned in his letter does 
not appear elsewhere in the record. He also states that the Petitioner "led our theater group to the 
international theater festivals," but again there is no documentary evidence of the mentioned festivals, 
nor is the letter specific about how she led the group or whether she or the group received acclaim for 
performing at these festivals. 
The evidence shows that the Petitioner's work as an actress in some Nepali theater productions 
received positive reviews and attention at the national level, and that her work in adapting and directing 
plays, primarily at the student level, was well appreciated. However, this media attention occurred 
6 
over a brief period of time, and the record does not show that her work was formally recognized by 
performing arts organizations or establish that it led to commercial success or notable financial gain 
for the Petitioner. Further, while her work in other roles in Nepali theater was mentioned in critical 
reviews of the work, the evidence does not establish that this work placed her as one of the few 
directors or translators/adaptors at the very top of the field. When the record is viewed in its entirety, 
it does not show that the Petitioner enjoyed sustained acclaim at the national or international level for 
her work as an actor in theater and film, or for her work in other roles in theater production and 
direction. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held 
that even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of her work is indicative of the required sustained national or 
international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )(l)(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in the field, and that she is one of the small percentage who has risen 
to the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her eligibility as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7