dismissed EB-1A Case: Art

' identifyinp data deleted to 
prevent dearly unwarranted 
invasion d pemd privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
EAC 04 230 51982 
IN RE: 
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: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
\3 
F~obert P. Wiernann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in the arts, pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A). The director 
determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary 
to qualifjr for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a statement professing her ability but stating that her immigration 
status has prevented her from reaching her full potential. She does not attempt to rebut any of the 
director's factual or legal conclusions. We uphold the director's conclusions for the reasons discussed 
below. The standard for the classification sought does not allow for a subjective evaluation of ability or 
potential; rather the statute and pertinent regulations require that the alien already enjoy national or 
international acclaim in the field. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(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 entry to the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the 
individual 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). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien 
has sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise are set 
forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It 
should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that she has sustained national or 
international acclaim at the very top level. 
Page 3 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as an artist. The 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international 
recognized award). Baning the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at 
least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. The petitioner has never explained which three criteria she meets. 
The criteria follow. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner initially asserted that she had received "numerous" awards but failed to elaborate. She 
submitted a Certificate of Excellence issued to her by Mercer County Community College in 
recognition for her work on an advertising design campaign for HiTOPS. An article in an unidentified 
newspaper indicates that the beneficiary's three-person team was one of two groups to win the end-of- 
semester advertising design competition. The article indicates the competition was limited to students. 
The director requested additional evidence, stating that the student award was not considered 
nationally or internationally recognized. In response, the petitioner submitted a certificate issued by the 
Krosno House of Culture in 2002 for "Distinction." 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not submitted evidence of nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards. The petitioner does not contest this conclusion. It is the petitioner's 
burden to submit evidence to address every element of a given criterion. Thus, the petitioner must 
submit evidence that any documented prizes or awards are nationally or internationally recognized. 
The petitioner has not demonstrated that she has won a prize or award that national or international 
experts in the field aspire to win. Thus, the petitioner has not demonstrated that she meets this 
criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classzfication is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
In response to the director's request for additional evidence, the petitioner submitted evidence of her 
first year "associate" membership in "AIGA." Her membership card indicates that she joined in 2005, 
after the date of filing. The petitioner did not submit any evidence of the membership criteria for 
AIGA. Thus, the director concluded that the petitioner had not established that AIGA has exclusive 
membership criteria. The petitioner does not contest this conclusion on appeal and we concur with the 
director. Regardless, the petitioner must establish her eligibility as of the date of filing, in this case 
August 9, 2004. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg. Comrn. 
197 1). Thus, we cannot consider her membership in AIGA. 
Published materials about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classzfication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The petitioner initially submitted two articles regarding her final project at Mercer County Community 
College. The petitioner identified the publications as the Princeton Packet and the Mercer County 
Community College Voice. The director concluded that the petitioner had not submitted evidence 
sufficient to meet this criterion. The petitioner does not contest this conclusion on appeal. 
The record lacks evidence that either newspaper enjoys a national or international circulation. Rather, 
one appears to be a local publication and the other appears to be a school newspaper. Thus, the 
petitioner has not established that these published materials appeared in major media. Therefore, the 
petitioner has not established that she 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 alliedfield of speczfication for which classzfication is sought. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that she offered updated designs of a company logo for Gallup and 
Robinson, Inc. The director concluded that this evidence did not set the beneficiary apart from other 
graphic artists. The petitioner does not challenge this conclusion on appeal. We are not persuaded that 
having a client in one's own local area who is interested in redesigning their logo is evidence of judging 
the work of others in the same field such that it is indicative of national or international acclaim. Thus, 
the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientiJic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signiJicance in the field. 
The director concluded that local displays of the beneficiary's work were not indicative of an influence 
or impact in the field. The petitioner does not challenge this conclusion on appeal and we concur with 
the director. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner does not contest the director's conclusion that the record lacks evidence relating to this 
criterion and we concur with the director. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in thefield at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that her work has been displayed at local galleries and a local real 
estate office. The director acknowledged this evidence but failed to reach a conclusion. As discussed 
above, the petitioner also submitted a certificate of distinction for a display at an open-air exhibition in 
Krosno, Poland. The evidence submitted to meet a given criterion must be indicative of or consistent 
with national or international acclaim if that standard is to have any meaning. It is inherent to the field 
of visual arts to display one's work. Agreements with local galleries to display her work for sale and 
having a local real estate office as a customer are not indicative of or consistent with national or 
international acclaim. The record lacks evidence regarding the beneficiary's display in Krosno. For 
example, the petitioner has not established whether it was by invitation only or otherwise indicative of 
national or international acclaim. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has peflormed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
As noted by the director, the petitioner submitted evidence that she is the sole manager of Aria Graphic 
Design, LLC. The record lacks evidence that Aria Graphic Design enjoys a distinguished reputation 
nationally or internationally. For example, the record lacks national media coverage of the company or 
even evidence that the company has clients nationwide. Thus, the petitioner has not established that 
she meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signzficantly high remuneration for 
services, in relation to others in thefield. 
The petitioner submitted checks issued to her by customers and receipts for her artwork sold by a local 
gallery. The petitioner did not submit evidence of high-end compensation in the field for comparison 
purposes. Thus, we cannot determine whether the petitioner's remuneration is significantly high in 
relation to others in the field. It is the petitioner's burden to submit evidence to meet every element of a 
given criterion. On appeal, the petitioner does not contest the director's conclusion that the petitioner 
failed to establish that she meets this criterion and we concur with the director. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofice receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
The director failed to discuss this criterion. The petitioner, however, is not a performing artist. As 
such, this criterion does not appear applicable to the petitioner's field. 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate 
that the alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small percentage 
who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
Review of the record, however, does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself as an 
artist to such an extent that she may be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim 
or to be within the small percentage at the very top of her field. The evidence indicates that the 
Page 6 
petitioner shows talent as an artist, but is not persuasive that the petitioner's achievements set her 
significantly above almost all others in her field. Therefore, the petitioner has not established eligibility 
pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the 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. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal 
will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.