dismissed EB-1A Case: Art Restoration

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Avc., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington. DC 20529 
'U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: - Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 7 ~O(W 
LIN 03 066 5 1666 
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. 5 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. 
V 6 Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative 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. $ I153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in the 
arts. The director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim 
necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel challenges the director's conclusions. For the reasons discussed below, we are satisfied that 
the petitioner meets one of the ten regulatory criteria, three of which must be met to establish eligibility. As we 
find that the record falls short of establishing that the petitioner meets any other criterion, we uphold the 
director's ultimate conclusion that the petitioner has not established her eligibility for the classification sought. 
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. 
3 204.5(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. 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as an art restorer. 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). Barring 
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 submitted evidence that, she claims, meets the following criteria.' 
I 
The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for 
excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted a one-paragraph article in the June 22, 1986 issue of El Tiempo discussing a two-part 
opening for the Colon Theater of Bogota. The first part involved the Director of the Colombian Institute of 
Culture conferring its Medal upon Otto de Greiff for his "invaluable cultural work." The article describes the 
second part as follows: "a distinguished group of professionals [including the petitioner] will receive an award 
for their restoration of the main curtain of the Colon Theater." The director concluded that the record lacked 
evidence of the significance of this award. On appeal, counsel asserts that the petitioner received the award 
from the Colombian Institute of Culture, "the highest Colombian authority in the field." 
* The assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 534 (BIA 1988); 
Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). The article in El Tiempo confirms that Mr. de 
Greiff received an award from the Colombian Institute of Culture, but makes no mention of the source of the 
group award. The award itself is not in the record. Thus, we concur with the director that the petitioner has not 
established the significance of the award. Moreover, the award was presented in 1986, more than 16 years prior 
to the filing of the petition. As such, it is not evidence of sustained acclaim as of that date. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in a.~.sociations in the field for which class~fication is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, us judged by recognized national or international 
experts in their disciplines or fields. 
Initially, counsel asserted that the petitioner's accreditation as an art restorer satisfies this criterion. In his 
request for additional evidence, the director requested evidence of the requirements for this accreditation. In 
response, the petitioner submitted the following 1980 resolution of the Council of National Monuments: 
The persons or entities executing labors of conservation, restoration or recuperation of the 
previously mentioned objects must obtain prior license from the Council of National 
Monuments, which will be awarded to those who are accredited with the technical knowledge 
indispensable for the proper execution of the work. 
The petitioner's license itself indicates that it is based on her completion of ten academic semesters, a final 
project, and two years of experience as a restorer. The director concluded that the record did not establish that 
licensure as an art restorer requires outstanding achievements. Counsel does not contest this conclusion on 
appeal and we concur with the director. 
Published materials crbout the alien in projessiond or mujor trade publicutions or other mujor media, 
relaling to the alien's work in the field for which classi~cation is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The only evidence relating to this criterion is the above-mentioned article in El Tiempo. The director dismissed 
this evidence as insufficient. On appeal, counsel does not explicitly contest this conclusion, although he does 
assert that El Tiempo is the leading newspaper in Colombia with a national distribution. The petitioner did not 
decision. 
submit any circulation data for this publication to support counsel's assertion. Regardless, the article is not 
primarily about the petitioner. Furthermore, as with the award discussed in the article, it is from 1986, more 
than 16 years prior to the filing of the petition. As such, it is not evidence of the petitioner's sustained acclaim 
as of that date. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholurly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contribufions of 
major signijicance in thejeld. 
Initially, counsel asserted that the priceless nature of the art restored by the petitioner demonstrated her 
contributions to the field. In his request for additional evidence, the director inquired as to whether the 
petitioner had utilized techniques previously unknown to art restorers. In response, the petitioner submitted her 
personal declaration asserting that she developed a technique for large murals using "prepared colored bases" 
that reduces 30 percent of the labor costs of a restoration. The petitioner also asserts that she has designed 
solutions and prepared and tested materials with new products available locally to maintain the authenticity of 
the work being restored. Finally, the petitioner claims to have created a moisturizing paste from aloe for paper 
restoration and conservation of black and white photographs. 
The director concluded that the reference letters did not address these achievements or identify any other 
specific contribution of major significance to the field. On appeal, counsel asserts that the "laudatory words in 
the numerous expert opinions [sic] letters submitted are the very result of [the petitioner's] development of 
restoration techniques that have been considered a major contribution in the field of art restoration in that they 
have allowed the successful recovery of 'some of the most valuable works of art and some of the most sacred 
religious artifacts to be found in museums and private collections."' 
Helena Wiesner, Dean of Art and Antique Restoration Faculty at Externado de Colombia University, praises the 
quality of the petitioner's work and her technique. Ms. Wiesner further states that based on the petitioner's 
"qualifications and experience, [she] was selected by the Ministry of Culture of Colombia to teach an intensive 
course on conservation and restoration of original polychromatic wood works." Eugenia Serpa Isaza, 
Coordinator of the National Center of Restoration of the Ministry of Culture, asserts that the petitioner also 
taught multicolored sculpture. These references do not indicate that the petitioner's technique with prepared 
colored bases has been influential or that the Ministry requested the petitioner to teach this technique based on 
its uniqueness and potential importance to the field. 
The petitioner also submitted a letter from Clemencia Vernaza, a Swiss UNESCO consultant in Colombia, who, 
according to her resume, planned and coordinated the conservation of artworks at the Santa Barbara Church and 
the Church Nuestra Senora de Egipto. Ms. Wiesner indicates that the petitioner worked on both projects. Ms. 
Vernaza praises the petitioner's skill and concludes that the petitioner's education and training "makes her a rare 
exception among art restorers and gives her a profound knowledge of artworks in all of their aspects.'' Ms. 
Vernaza asserts that she sought the petitioner's advice in three areas: "1) esthetic presentation of artworks, 2) 
specific restoration problems and 3) organization of work." Ms. Vernaza does not, however, make any specific 
reference to prepared color bases or other unique techniques developed by the petitioner. While this letter 
confirms that the petitioner provided advice to a UNESCO consultant, without additional information we cannot 
conclude such advice constitutes a contribution of major significance to the field of art restoration as a whole. 
Rosario Molinos-Vela, Manager of Molinos-Velasquez Publishers, asserts that the petitioner has consulted for 
the company regarding research and preservation of cultural patrimony, their editorial mission. The record is 
not persuasive that such consulting constitutes a contribution of major significance to the field of art restoration. 
In a subsequent letter, Mr. Molinos-Vela asserts that the art restored by the petitioner has a commercial value 25 
percent higher than prior to restoration. It is inherent to the profession of art restoration to increase the value of 
the art restored. Mr. Molinos-Vela is not persuasive that this increase in value constitutes a contribution of 
major significance to the field of art restoration. For example, the record does not establish that this is a 
significantly higher increase than typical for restored art. In fact, Yvonne Lopez C., an independent consultant 
in the field of art restoration, states that with esthetic restoration, "historical and material values are increased in 
economic terms up to 100% of the original value." 
Nicholas Dorman, Chief Paintings Conservator for the Seattle Art Museum, bases his opinion on a review of the 
documents submitted in support of this petition. He does not indicate that he had ever heard of the petitioner or 
her work prior to being contacted for a reference. He asserts that the nature of the projects with which the 
petitioner has been entrusted is indicative of the petitioner's "status as one of the preeminent conservators in her 
country." He does not indicate that the petitioner has made a contribution of major significance to the field as a 
whole. 
Several other Colombian art restorers and professors attest to the importance of the petitioner's education and 
the projects on which the petitioner has worked. They affirm their high opinion of her abilities. They do not 
identify any specific contribution to the field of art restoration or explain how the petitioner has impacted their 
own work or the work of other restorers. 
Two letters do reference the petitioner's specific techniques. Emilia Cortes M., an associate conservator with 
the American Institute for Conservation at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, states: 
The approach to her work has shown exceptional commitment to the advancement of the 
profession, extending beyond her dedication to the continuous improvement of her skills, in 
development of ethically and technically correct conservation treatments in a variety of 
institutional and cultural contexts, some times in places where resources were not available, 
have been major challenges that [the petitioner] has faced and solved with remarkable success. 
While Ms. Cortes asserts that she has no current ties to Colombia or Venezuela, where the petitioner has studied 
and worked, Ms. Cortes acknowledges that the petitioner was a student of hers in Colombia. Ms. Cortes does 
not assert that the petitioner's conservation treatments have been influential or explain how they have impacted 
the field of art restoration. 
Similarly, Giuseppe Di Fiandra, Wall Painting Restorer of the Profiel in Brussels, asserts that the petitioner "has 
demonstrated extraordinary ability on the most critical roles of fine art restoration during the color reintegration 
and esthetic presentation of the most diversified artistic and historical pieces of art." Mr. Di Fiandra does not 
explain how he came to know of the petitioner's work, although he does state that he obtained his education in 
the field at the University Externado de Colombia, where the petitioner has taught. Mr. Di Fiandra does not 
explain how the petitioner's work has impacted the field or specify that her techniques have been influential. 
The record is not persuasive that his four years of experience in the field provides sufficient expertise to 
evaluate the petitioner's contributions to that field. 
The above letters are mostly from the petitioner's collaborators and immediate colleagues. While such letters 
are important in providing details about the petitioner's role in various projects. they cannot by themselves 
establish the petitioner's influence over the field as a whole. Moreover, independent evidence that already 
existed prior to the preparation of the visa petition package carries greater weight than new materials 
prepared especially for submission with the petition. 
Ultimately, the letters establish that the petitioner is well educated in her field and talented. She has worked on 
many restoration projects. That the petitioner was able to work in her field of art restoration, however, is not 
evidence that she has made a contribution of major significance to that field. Art that is not valuable or 
important is rarely restored. As such, restoring valuable and important art is inherent to the petitioner's field 
and, in and of itself, is not evidence of her national acclaim or contribution to the field. 
Evidence ofthe display of the alien's work in the$eld at artistic exhibitions or showcuses. 
The artwork restored by the petitioner is on display in churches and elsewhere. The director concluded these 
displays did not distinguish the petitioner from other restorers. As implied by the director. any artist who 
restores art is restoring items for display. On appeal, counsel notes that the restored items are not on display as 
the work of the restorer, but as works of the original artist. This fact is not helpful to the petitioner. Assuming 
displays of restored art typically do not credit the restorer, it remains that a display that does not credit the 
petitioner does not garner her any acclaim. The petitioner asserts that exhibit 17 of the response to the director's 
request for additional evidence is a document reflecting that she was credited as the restorer for an exhibit at the 
Religious Art Museum in 1989. The record, however, does not contain this document. Regardless, the petition 
was filed more than I3 years later. Thus, this credit would not demonstrate the petitioner's sustained national 
acclaim as of the date of filing. It remains, the petitioner has not demonstrated that the museums or churches 
where her restored work is displayed credit her with their restoration. The record also lacks evidence that any 
art restoration trade journal has featured her work as examples of notable restorations (as opposed to notable art 
that happens to have been restored). 
Evidence that the alien hus performed in a leading or critic01 role for organizations or establishments that 
have a distinguished reputation. 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not identified a specific organization for which she had played a 
leading or critical role. We are persuaded, however, by Mr. Dorman's implication that the projects on which a 
restorer has worked are indicative of her status in the field. Thus, we would accept evidence of a leading role on 
a restoration project with national importance as comparable evidence to meet this criterion. We find that the 
petitioner has served in a leading role on such projects. Thus, we find that the petitioner meets this criterion. 
For the reasons discussed above, however, the record does not establish that the petitioner meets any other 
criterion. 
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 art restorer 
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 petitioner shows talent 
as an art restorer, 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. $ 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.