dismissed EB-1A Case: Arts

identifying Czta fadelctec! to 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
7 - 
prevent cle~ly uawu~anted 
invasion of sersonal privacy 
 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
PUBLIC COP y 
- - 
LIN 07 057 50586 
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. €j 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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
kting Chief, 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 (AAO) 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. 5 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 necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. More specifically, the director found that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate 
receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the regulatory 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). Counsel indicated on the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, that a brief andlor 
additional evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 days. The appeal was filed on May 29, 
2008. As of this date, more than one year later, the AAO has received nothing further. 
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 into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (INS) have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for 
individuals seeking immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 
60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). 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. 9 204.5(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. § 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, filed on December 15, 2006, 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, internationally 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. A petitioner, however, 
cannot establish eligibility for this classification merely by submitting evidence that simply relates to 
at least three criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). In determining whether the petitioner meets a 
specific criterion, the evidence itself must be evaluated in terms of whether it is indicative of or 
consistent with sustained national or international acclaim. A lower evidentiary standard would not 
be consistent with the regulatory definition of "extraordinary ability" as "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 petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the 
following criteria.' 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the Jield for which classijcation is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary 
translation. 
In general, in order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be primarily about the petitioner 
and, as stated in the regulations, be printed in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media. To quali@ as major media, the publication should have significant national or international 
distribution. An alien would not earn acclaim at the national level from a local publication. Some 
newspapers, such as the New York Times, nominally serve a particular locality but would qualify as 
major media because of significant national distribution, unlike small local community papers.2 
The petitioner submitted articles in El Norte, Milenio: Diario de Monterrey, Sierra Madre, Las 
Cumbres, Imagenes, GP, Vida!, La Silla, ABC Valle Edition, El Siglo De Torreon, and Intewisionista. 
The petitioner also submitted material in Casa & Estilo International magazine, but this material was 
limited to only two sentences and its author was not identified. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), any 
document containing foreign language submitted to USCIS shall be accompanied by a full English 
language translation that the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the translator's 
certification that he or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English. The 
English language translations accompanying the preceding articles were incomplete and were not 
certified by the translator as required by the regulation. 
' The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this decision. 
2 
 Even with nationally-circulated newspapers, consideration must be given to the placement of the article. For example, 
an article that appears in the Washington Post, but in a section that is distributed only in Fairfax County, Virginia, for 
instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
The petitioner's initial submission included information about Casa & Estilo International magazine 
from its "Online Media Kit" stating that the magazine is "the leading home design and upscale lifestyle 
magazine in the U.S. Hispanic Market" and that the "publication has a reach of 250,000 readers." The 
self-serving nature of these claims in the magazine's Online Media Kit is not sufficient to demonstrate 
that Casa & EstiIIo International qualifies as a form of major media. On appeal, the petitioner submits 
an unsigned and undated letter from the Director of Casa & Estilo International stating that the issue in 
which the petitioner's work appeared had 40,000 copies in print. This letter was unaccompanied by a 
certified English language translation as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). 
Further, aside from the self-serving nature of the statement from the magazine's director, the 
information provided fails to demonstrate that this publication qualifies as a form of major media. The 
record lacks objective circulation information from an independent source showing the ranking of the 
magazine relative to other national media. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted information about El Norte 
from Wikpedia stating that the newspaper is headquartered in Monterrey and "is the largest newspaper 
in the north of Mexico." Regarding information fiom Wikipedia, there are no assurances about the 
reliability of the content from this open, user-edited internet site.3 See Lamilem Badasa v. Michael 
Mukasey, No. 07-2276 (8th Cir. August 29, 2008). Accordingly, we will not assign weight to 
information for which Wikipedia is the only cited source. 
In addressing the preceding evidence, the director's decision stated: 
The Service advised the petitioner that the articles were not accompanied by certified English 
translations. The Service requested that for any article the petitioner wished to claim in 
support of the criterion, she must submit a complete copy of the article along with a literal 
English translation. The Service also requested evidence that establishes the nature and 
purpose of each publication including its distribution~circulation. In response, the petitioner 
provided copies of the articles along with translations/summary translations. The petitioner 
also provided information regarding El Norte and Arte: A Contemporary Latin Expression. 
3 
Online content fiom Wikipedia is subject to the following general disclaimer: 
WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GURANTEE OF VALIDITY. Wikipedia is an online open-content collaborative 
encyclopedia, that is, a voluntary association of individuals and groups working to develop a common resource 
of human knowledge. The structure of the project allows anyone with an Internet connection to alter its content. 
Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by people with the expertise required 
to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information. . . . Wikipedia cannot guarantee the validity of 
the information found here. The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or 
altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields. 
See http:l/en.wikipedia.or~/wikilWiki~edia:Genera disclaimer, accessed on May 28, 2009, copy incorporated into the 
record of proceeding. 
Upon review, many of the newspaper articles pertain to art exhibitions in which the petitioner 
has participated. However, the Service does not find that the articles satisfy this criterion. 
Many of the articles appeared in the newspaper publication El Norte. This paper is based in 
Monterrey which also appears to be the petitioner's current residence in Mexico. The 
information provided indicates that this is the largest newspaper in northern Mexico; 
however, actual circulation figures were not provided. Regardless, the Service finds that this 
appears to be more akin to a local or regional newspaper rather than a major media source. It 
is reasonable to assert that this publication primarily covers local art events hence the 
coverage of the petitioner's gallery exhibitions. It must also be noted that the petitioner has 
failed to provide information regarding the other newspapers that carried articles about her 
exhibitions. In the absence of additional evidence, the record fails to establish that these 
publications can be considered commensurate with major media. In summary, the evidence 
fails to establish that the newspaper articles can be considered published material about the 
petitioner in professional or major trade publications or other major media. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits online media information printed from www.elnorte.com for El Norte, 
Sierra Madre, GP, Vida!, and La Silla. On appeal, counsel notes that the circulation information 
provided from www.elnorte.com for these publications was certified by Pricewaterhouse Coopers S.C. 
According to the submitted documentation, the latter four publications appear to be sections or sub- 
editions of the El Norte publication. The information provided states that El Norte places "a particular 
emphasis on the northeastern region of the country." The information also states that El Norte has an 
ordinary press run of 134,771 and a Sunday press run of 186,976. With regard to Sierra Madre, the 
information states that this "section" reports on "social, cultural and community events in San Pedro 
Garza Garcia" and refers to it as a "communications vehcle for the county's residents." The 
information also states that Sierra Madre has a press run of 17,352 subscribers. In regard to GP, the 
information states that it is aimed at "residents of the suburb of Garza Garcia7' and has a press run of 
17,352 subscribers. With regard to Vida!, the information states that this "section" reports on "the life 
and customs of Monterrey's people." The information also states that the Vida! section of El Norte has 
an ordinary press run of 134,771 and a Sunday press run of 186,976. Finally, in regard to La Silla, the 
information states that this "suburban edition" is "targeted at the south Monterrey community" and has 
a press run of 12,472. 
In this case, aside from the English language translations of the articles being incomplete and not 
certified by the translator as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3), the record lacks 
evidence (such as objective circulation information from an independent source) showing the 
distribution of the preceding publications relative to other national media to demonstrate that the 
submitted articles were published in professional or major trade publications or some other form of 
major media. 
The petitioner submitted pages from a book published by Casa & Estilo International magazine in 2005 
entitled Arte: A Contemporary Latin Expression. This 265-page book profiles thirty artists and devotes 
less than ten sentences to the petitioner and her work. The petitioner's artwork appears on pages 125 to 
130 of the book. We note that the majority of this book is not about the petitioner and her artwork. In 
addressing this book, the director's decision stated: 
The petitioner . . . provided an excerpt from the book Arte: A Contemporary Latin 
Expression. The petitioner is one of thirty Latin American artists who are profiled in the 
book. The section relating to the petitioner contains a brief introductory paragraph and 
several pages of her art work. While being included in such a publication is evidence of 
some degree of recognition, it is not sufficient to meet this criterion. Most notably, the 
section regarding the petitioner only includes a brief paragraph that does not provide an in 
depth discussion of her career and achievements in the field. Further, the record contains no 
evidence regarding the significance of this publication including the number of copies sold. 
In the absence of additional evidence, this publication is not sufficient to meet this criterion. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits an unsigned and undated letter from the Director of Casa & Estilo 
International stating that the book had 10,000 copies in print and a present distribution of 8,250 copies. 
As discussed, this letter was unaccompanied by a certified English language translation as required by 
the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3). Further, aside from the self-serving nature of the statement 
fi-om Casa & Estilo International's director, the information provided fails to demonstrate that this book 
qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or some other form of major media. For 
example, there is no evidence showing that the book had substantial national or international 
readership, that the book had significantly higher sales relative to other national art publications, or that 
the book was otherwise circulated in a manner consistent with sustained national or international 
acclaim. 
In light of the above, 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 alliedjield of speclJication for which classification is 
sought. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) provides that "[a] petition for an alien of extraordinary 
ability must be accompanied by evidence that the alien has sustained national or international 
acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Evidence 
of the petitioner's participation as a judge must be evaluated in terms of these requirements. The 
weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv), therefore, 
depends 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 consistent with the regulatory definition of "extraordinary ability" as "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). For example, judging a national competition 
involving professional artists is of far greater probative value than judging a local competition involving 
students or amateurs. 
The petitioner submitted a December 1,2005 letter from 
 Vice President of Corporate 
Communications & Public Affairs for CEMEX, stating: 
[The petitioner] has taken part, for many years, in a series of cultural events in our company. 
Particularly, [the petitioner] took part in a panel of judges during important painting contests 
at CEMEX, beginning back in October 1997, when she was a judge, along with a prestigious 
panel of professional painters, judging participants on the mural contest about "environment 
protection." In the October 1999 mural contest the general theme was "say no to drugs" and 
[the petitioner] was one of the judges again. 
In addressing this evidence, the director's decision stated: 
The petitioner has provided a letter that indicates she took part in a panel of judges during 
painting contests at Cemex. More specifically, in October of 1997, she judged participants 
on the mural contest about "environment protection." Subsequently in October of 1999, she 
judged a mural contest with the theme of "say no to drugs." While the petitioner's service as 
a judge at these events indicates she is valued for her knowledge and expertise, it has not 
been established that serving in such a capacity has garnered her any recognition consistent 
with national or international acclaim. The petitioner has not otherwise established the 
significance of these competitions; the requirements necessary to participate; the criteria 
utilized to select the judges; etc. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a second letter fiom stating: 
[The petitioner] is one of the top artists in Monterrey, Mexico. . . . Monterrey's cultural 
community is proud of what [the petitioner] has accomplished locally and nationally. 
For this reason, and all of her long and prestigious career, it is my understanding that CEMEX 
decided to invite [the petitioner] to take part in a panel of judges during painting contests in 
October 1997 and 1999. She was selected out of a number of renowned artists given her 
prestigious career as painter. 
[The petitioner's] outstanding work made possible to judge participants on the mural contest 
about environment protection and the social mural contest regarding our campaign of saying no 
to drugs. Her work during these contests allowed [the petitioner] a further recognition as a 
unique Monterrey artist whose interest goes beyond pure artistic painting. . . . These 
competitions had a deep impact in Monterrey's society and youth those years. 
The limited information in 
 letters does not indicate whether the petitioner judged youth 
or adult professionals in the CEMEX painting contests. The plain language of this regulatory criterion 
requires "[elvidence of the alien's participation . . . as a judge of the work of others in the same or an 
allied field of specification." We cannot conclude that evaluating youth, who have not yet begun 
working in the field, meets this requirement. Further, there is no supporting evidence demonstrating 
the level of acclaim associated with judging the CEMEX contest. Nor is there evidence showing the 
specific work judged by the petitioner, the names of the individuals she evaluated, their level of 
artistic expertise, or documentation of her assessments. The absence of contemporaneous evidence 
of the petitioner's participation as a judge is a significant omission from the record. The benefit 
sought in the present matter is not the type for which documentation is typically unavailable and the 
statute specifically requires "extensive documentation" to establish eligibility. See section 
203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act. The commentary for the proposed regulations implementing this statute 
provide that the "intent of Congress that a very high standard be set for aliens of extraordinary ability is 
reflected in this regulation by requiring the petitioner to present more extensive documentation than that 
required" for lesser classifications. 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30704 (July 5, 1991). Without substantive 
evidence showing, for example, that the petitioner has judged experienced professionals in a manner 
consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field, we cannot 
conclude that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientzfic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contributions of major signzjicance in the field. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a letter of support from 
Art Dealer collection Privee Art ~allei~, who states that she is the 
 art 
dealer in Florida. 
 letter praises the petitioner's talent as a painter and states that her 
works range in price from $6000 to $10,000. Artistic talent and positioning one's artwork for sale, 
however, are not necessarily indicative of original artistic contributions of major significance. 
 The 
record lacks evidence showing that the petitioner has made original artistic contributions that have 
significantly influenced or impacted her field. 
In addressing the petitioner's evidence for this criterion, the director's decision stated: 
As evidence in support of this criterion, the petitioner references a letter submitted from an 
art critic and her appearance in Arte: A Contemporary Latin Expression. However, this 
evidence is not sufficient to meet this criterion. The mere fact that the petitioner is actively 
painting and exhibiting her works is not an original contribution of major significance to the 
field. The record in the immediate case does not establish that the petitioner has otherwise 
introduced any new techniques, methodologies, or styles that have been recognized and 
adopted by others and which have significantly impacted the field. 
We concur with the director's findings. With regard to the petitioner's artwork being included in 
Arte: A Contemporary Latin Expression, this evidence has already been addressed under the 
regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iii). Here it should be emphasized that the regulatory 
criteria are separate and distinct from one another. Because separate criteria exist for published 
material and original contributions of major significance, USCIS clearly does not view these criteria 
as being interchangeable. If evidence sufficient to meet one criterion mandated a finding that an 
alien met another criterion, the requirement that an alien meet at least three criteria would be 
meaningless. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter from, President, artedemundo.com, 
stating: 
[The petitioner's] work has the balance between technique and her visionary and creative 
approach. It has a purpose. The beauty and peace as sublime realms. Her paintings['] 
prices are due to this particular balance, the collectors' demand of her of her works here in 
Mexico and abroad, the galleries that represent her exclusively and the world renowned 
artists that accompanied her in these galleries; and also her professional career of more than 
eighteen years of sustained work in the arts. 
The evidence submitted by the petitioner does not establish that her artistic achievements constitute 
original contributions of major significance in contemporary art. According to the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(v), an alien's contributions must be not only original but of major 
significance. We must presume that the phrase "major significance" is not superfluous and, thus, 
that it has some meaning. While the petitioner's artwork has earned the admiration of the Monterrey 
arts community and her art dealers, there is nothing to demonstrate that her work has had major 
significance in the field at large. For example, the record does not indicate the extent of the 
petitioner's influence on other artists nationally or internationally, nor does it show that the field has 
somehow changed as a result of her work. 
In this case, the letters of recommendation submitted by the petitioner are not sufficient to meet this 
criterion. These letters, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a success~l 
extraordinary ability claim. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion statements 
submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comrnr. 
1988). However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an 
alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. 
 Id. 
 The submission of letters of support from the 
petitioner's personal contacts is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the 
content of those letters as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. Thus, the 
content of the writers' statements and how they became aware of the petitioner's reputation are 
important considerations. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by an alien in 
support of an immigration petition are of less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of 
original contributions of major significance that one would expect of an artist who has sustained 
national or international acclaim at the very top of the field. Without extensive documentation 
showing that the petitioner's work has been unusually influential, highly acclaimed throughout her 
field, or has otherwise risen to the level of original contributions of major significance, we cannot 
conclude that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. 
In addressing the petitioner's evidence for this criterion, the director's decision stated: 
Page 10 
The petitioner has provided evidence which indicates she has exhibited her works at 
numerous galleries and events in Mexico, Canada, Japan, the United States, etc. The 
petitioner specifically references her exhibits at Collection Privee located in Miami Beach, 
FL; Promo-Arte in Tokyo, Japan; Art Works Gallery in Vancouver, BC; Arte AC in 
Monterrey, Mexico; among others. While the evidence indicates the petitioner has been 
active in the field, it does not support a finding that the petitioner has achieved sustained 
national or international acclaim. The fact remains that the petitioner is an artist (painter), it 
is inherent to her field to display her work not only for others to enjoy but also for 
promotional and sales purposes. While it appears that many of the galleries can be 
considered popular and in some instances include work from well-known artists, the record 
does not establish that the venues are of the stature and prestige that they can be considered 
the top galleries in the field. Further, while being invited to participate in exhibits such as 
Amistad at Art Works is an honor and a laudable achievement, it has not been established 
that the petitioner's exhibitions are so extraordinary that they place her at the pinnacle of the 
field. Not every event can be considered an exhibition or showcase such that it is indicative 
or consistent with national or international acclaim. 
Upon review, we find the director properly considered the evidence submitted, thoroughly addressed 
counsel's arguments and appropriately addressed the evidence and arguments in his decision. On 
appeal, the petitioner does not contest the director's analysis. With regard to the art galleries and 
university exhibitions in which the petitioner's works were shown, it must be stressed that an artist 
does not satisfy this criterion simply by arranging for her work to be displayed. All artists who make 
a living in their field must exhibit their work for sale. In this case, the petitioner has not submitted 
evidence showing that her paintings have been displayed at significant artistic venues consistent with 
sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field. For example, there is no 
indication that renowned art museums have consistently displayed her work. Accordingly, we 
concur with the director's finding that the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, counsel states: 
The PetitionerBeneficiary has . . . performed in a "leading or critical role" for organizations 
or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. The PetitionerBeneficiary is 
represented in Florida by the Collection Privee Art Gallery. In addition, the 
PetitionerBeneficiary represented the government of Mexico at an Art Exhibit in Vancouver, 
Canada commemorating the anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between 
Mexico and Canada. 
In addressing the petitioner's evidence for this criterion, the director's decision stated: "The 
petitioner claims that she has performed in a leading or critical role for Collection Privee Art Gallery 
and the government of Mexico. However, the petitioner has not explained and demonstrated how 
she has in fact performed in a leading or critical role for these establishments." 
Page 11 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a May 20, 2008 letter from 
 Consul General of the 
Mexican Consulate in Vancouver, British Columbia, stating: 
This is to certify that the Mexican Painter, [the petitioner], was one of the five artist participants 
who represented Mexico in the art exhibit "Amistad" (Friendshp) which took place fi-om 
October 18 to November 15 of the year 2004 at the Art Works Gallery in the city of Vancouver 
to commemorate the 6oth Anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between 
Mexico and Canada. 
[The petitioner] was the only artist who came from Mexico for this exhibition due to it was 
taken into consideration that her work was a faithhl representative of the contemporary art of 
our country. 
In addressing this evidence, counsel states: "The [petitioner] was chosen by the Mexican Government 
to be an international an international artistic representative to Canada. Representing one's own country 
is a high honor that cannot be surpassed." 
We cannot conclude that the petitioner's one-time participation in an exhbit at the Art Works Gallery is 
tantamount to a leading or critical role for the government of Mexico. The display of the petitioner's 
work by the Collection Privee Art Gallery in Florida and the Art Works Gallery in Vancouver has 
already been addressed under the regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(vii). While display 
of the petitioner's artwork has been arranged by the Mexican Consulate in Vancouver and the 
Collection Privee Art Gallery, there is no supporting evidence showing that these organizations had 
a distinguished national reputation among arts institutions. Further, there is no evidence 
demonstrating that the petitioner's role was leading or critical for the Mexican Consulate and the 
Collection Privee Art Gallery. For example, there is no evidence showing the percentage of sales 
revenue earned by the petitioner's paintings in comparison to those of the other artists represented by 
Arnira Saadat of Collection Privee Art Gallery. The documentation submitted by the petitioner does 
not establish that she was responsible for the preceding organizations' success or standing to a degree 
consistent with the meaning of "leading or critical role" and indicative of sustained national or 
international acclaim. 
In light of the above, 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 the field. 
In addressing the petitioner's evidence for this criterion, the director's decision stated: 
 "The 
petitioner has provided information regarding the pricing, consignment and sale of her art work. 
However, the petitioner has not demonstrated how her remuneration and the value of her artwork 
compare to other artists in the field." We concur with the director's finding. The plain language of 
this regulatory criterion requires the petitioner to submit evidence of a high salary "in relation to 
others in the field." The petitioner offers no basis for comparison showing that her compensation was 
significantly high in relation to others in her field. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that 
she meets this criterion. 
In this case, we concur with the director's finding that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate her 
receipt of a major internationally recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the criteria that 
must be satisfied to establish the national or international acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The conclusion we reach by considering the evidence 
to meet each criterion separately is consistent with a review of the evidence in the aggregate. Even 
in the aggregate, the evidence does not distinguish the petitioner as one of the small percentage who 
has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. fj 204.5(h)(2). 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself 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 is not persuasive that the petitioner's 
achievements set her significantly above almost all others in her field at a national or international 
level. 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.