dismissed EB-1A Case: Creative Writing

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W.. Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: SEp 0 6 2005 
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. tj 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. 
u. G~obert P. Wiemann, D~rector 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont 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. $ 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in 
business and 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. 
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. 
5 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has sustained 
national or international acclaim and recognition in his field of expertise are set forth in the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. Lj 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that 
the petitioner must show that she has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on September 9, 2002, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a "SpanishlEnglish Advertising Creative Writer." 
On appeal, counsel states that Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) "misinterpreted the field of the 
beneficiary's endeavor. The Beneficiary is stated to be an alien of extraordinary ability in the field of 
Creative Writing which falls within the realm of any discipline that requires creativity in writing, such as 
advertising, copy writing, screenplay writing among others." 
The director's reliance on information provided under Part 6 of the Form 1-140 petition is not in error. In this 
section of the 1-140 petition, counsel, who prepared the form at the request of the petitioner, listed the 
"nontechnical description" of the petitioner's job as a "writer of advertising and marketing campaigns for the 
Page 3 
Hispanic community." Furthermore, there is no indication that the director's decision overlooked the 
evidence related to the petitioner's screenplay (for example, page 3 of the director's decision includes a 
detailed discussion about "Perfume and Thorns"). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(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 pertaining to the following criteria. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in thefield of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted a letter from"Director of the Independent Feature Film Market, the 
founding program of the Independent Feature Project (IFP)." He states: 
IFP Market has showcased the work of talented filmmakers living in the U.S. since 1979. 
[The petitioner's] excellent screenplay "PERFUME AND THORNS" was selected from 200 submissions 
to participate in the IFP Market in 2000. The selection committee felt that the strong lead character and 
dramatic story indicated good prospects for its potential acquisition for independent production. 
The record, however, contains no evidence showing that the petitioner's screenplay actually went to production. 
A letter from Noelle Deschamps, Founder and Vice-President of Association Equinoxe in France, states: 
[W]e hold and entirely fund two international screenwriters workshops twice a year. 
I had the chance to meet [the petitioner] when her excellent script "PERFUME AND THORNS" was 
selected over 1,000 scripts to participate in the March 2001 screenwriting workshop. She made it to a short 
list of 25 and then was finally invited, with a selective group of 8 talented writers from around the world, to 
attend a week-long session in Bordeaux, France. 
The purpose this worksh 
advisors such as writerlp 
("Dances with Wolves"), 
Daisy"), among others. Once the script has been polished we help the writer produce her movie. 
A March 6, 2002, letter fro-an internationally renowned film director, states that "'Perfume and 
Thorns' was selected among 300 scripts to attend the workshop in France." This 
number is significantly lower than the 1,000 scripts cited in letter. The petitioner has not 
resolved this discrepancy. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by 
independent objective evidence. Any attempt to explain or reconcile such inconsistencies will not suffice 
unless the petitioner submits competent objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 
Page 4 
I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). Doubt cast on any aspect of the petitioner's proof may, of course, lead to 
a reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the remaining evidence offered in support of the visa 
petition. 
further states that Equinoxe "develops the screenplays of talented young writers all over the world, in 
order to turn them into movies." 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a second letter from ated December 6. 2004, which provides 
further information about the Equinoxe symposium, stating: 
The selected 16 writers that have the opportunity to be granted ths experience every year are not 
necessarily young writers. 
The chosen writers (of whom 300 were initial candidates) are flown to France, lodged in a castle for 5 days 
and work with some of the most accomplished experts in the industry worldwide, to help the writers polish 
their scripts. 
concludes his letter by acknowledgng that the petitioner was unable to find a company to produce 
"Perfume and Thorns." 
The petitioner's selection to participate in the above developmental workshops for amateur screenwriters do 
not constitute nationally or intemationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in her field. We note 
that the preceding workshops are intended for novice screenwriters rather than for experienced professionals 
in the filmmaking industry. The purpose of such workshops is to allow screenwriters to perfect their scripts 
and to benefit fiom advice given on an individual basis by experienced professionals. etter 
does not refer to the petitioner as one "of the most accomplished experts in the industry." As stated 
previously, the visa classification sought by the 
to the very top of the field of endeavor" (such a for example). 
See 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). In this instance, 
(which provides tutorship and consultancy assistance for writers of independent films) elevates the petitioner 
to the very top of her field or represents national or international recognition for excellence in screenwriting. 
As noted by the director, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner's independent film was ever 
produced. While a screenwriter whose independent film wins a prize at the Sundance or Cannes film festivals 
would most likely satisfy this criterion, in this instance, the petitioner's workshop participation falls well short 
of distinguishing her from established professional screenwriters whose work actually makes it to a national 
audience. 
For the reasons set forth above, the evidence presented by the petitioner fails to show that her participation in 
the IFP Market in 2000 and the Equinoxe screenwiting workshop in 2001 are "nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards for excellence" in screenwriting. 
Page 5 
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 classification is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
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 qualify 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.' 
The petitioner's submission of published materials included copies of several articles with only one-sentence 
partial English language translations. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), any document containing foreign 
language submitted to CIS 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. With the exception of the article in Correio Braziliense, the 
petitioner's Spanish language articles fail to meet this requirement. 
We note that the article in Correio Braziliense is primarily abo-a Brazilian Executive 
Producer, rather than the petitioner or her work. 
The petitioner submitted incomplete translations of articles appearing in Anuncios in 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 
and 1992. None of the published materials devote more than a few sentences to the petitioner. In many of the 
articles, the petitioner herself was clearly not the primary subject of the published material. The plain wording 
of thls criterion, however, requires "published materials about the alien." If the petitioner is not the primary 
subject of the material, then it fails to demonstrate her individual acclaim. We further note that the statute and 
regulations require the petitioner's acclaim to be sustained. There is no indication that the petitioner has been the 
main subject of any articles published subsequent to 1992, or that she has received any U.S. media attention 
subsequent to her arrival in this country in 1994. Finally, there is no quantitative data indicating the volume of 
readership of the publications that briefly mention the petitioner. 
In conclusion, we find that the evidence presented by the petitioner is not adequate to show that she has been 
the primary subject of sustained major media attention. 
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 specification for which classification is sought. 
The petitioner submitted materials indicating that she served as one of 23 members on the judging panel for 
the Visual Club of New York City's "2"d Annual Hispanic Creative Awards" in 1996. The weight of this 
evidence is somewhat diminished because there is no evidence of the petitioner's participation as a judge of 
I 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, cannot 
serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 6 
the work of others in her field subsequent to 1996. One-time participation on a local panel of numerous 
judges does not automatically demonstrate that the petitioner has earned sustained national or international 
acclaim at the very top of her field. The director's decision noted that "this one instance of acting as the judge 
of others six years prior to the filing of the petition" was not adequate to satisfy this criterion. The 
petitioner's appellate submission does not challenge the director's finding. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientijic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted letters of support from individuals who have collaborated on various projects with 
the petitioner or worked with her at one time or another. These letters indicate that the petitioner has 
performed admirably for her employers and their clients, but her ability to significantly impact her industry in 
general has not been adequately demonstrated. 
The petitioner submitted a January 23, 2002 letter fromwho at that time was Creative 
Director at The Bravo Group, the Hispanic branch of the advertising agency Young and ~ubicam- 
ites: 
[The petitioner] has been collaborating with us as a copywriter since 1998, through the company Five, 
Image Factory, for major clients such as AT&T, Kraft, Advil and Centrum. Her outstanding writing 
abilities and her insightful understanding of the Hispanic market, made me require her services in 1999 
for a project that would become one of the largest accounts in the agency: the Youth Smoking 
Prevention Campaign (YSP) for Philip Morris. 
This print campaign, which is still running in magazines, was aimed to Hispanic teenagers between the 
ages of 9 and 12 to prevent them from starting smoking. It was a big project that required [the 
petitioner's] full-time collaboration for a whole year. 
The complete campaign has being [sic] entered in renowned advertising competitions such as 
Advertising Age's Hispanic Awards and Communication Arts among others. 
The record, however, contains no evidence showing that the petitioner's work for the campaign resulted in 
any major awards. 
vice President and Group Creative Director, The Bravo Group, states: 
For the Bravo Group . . . [the petitioner] was the creator of the Youth Smoking Prevention campaign for 
magazines that resulted in positioning Philip Morris as the third largest account of the agency. More 
importantly, her brilliant, creative and persuasive work resulted in reducing youth smoking among 
Hispanic teens by 38.5%, a major health contribution to the Hispanic community (Documented in the 
Teenage Attitudes and Behavior Study conducted by Philip Morris USA). 
The record, however, contains no statements fiom any Philip Morris executives indicating that the petitioner 
was primarily responsible for the success of the Youth Smoking Prevention campaign. Nor has the petitioner 
provided any excerpts from the Teenage Attitudes and Behavior Study that specifically credit the petitioner 
for the reduction in teen smolung. 
The petitioner's appellate submission includes a paid promotional piece in the "Special Advertising Section" 
of Advertising Age, which consists of various testimonials from Bravo Group clients, including one fiomm 
Sansone, Senior Communications Manager, Youth Smoking Prevention Group, Philip Morris USA, who 
states: 
We hired Bravo in 1998 to help us with the complex problem of convincing kids not to smoke. 
What impresses me about Bravo is my sense that I have the resources of their whole creative 
department behind my project. I meet a new creative person at nearly every meeting. They seem to 
open the project up to everyone in the agency, and if someone has a good idea, they incorporate it. 
My team leader is. . who is a great asset m focus~ng the team. Along wlth his right- 
hand person (account su ervlsor , the two of them manage the process and keep us on track. 
The head creatlve on our account s (VP-creative director), bnngs an tntensity and spirit 
to the work. 
(creative supervisor) does a lot of the writing, and she sometimes brings me to tears 
with some of her writing. Another person who's made an ~mpact is . . . 
They make up the core of our team, but there are many others who contribute to the effort. 
does not indicate that the petitioner served as a "core" team member on the Youth Smoking 
Prevention campaign. We cannot ignore that-, rather than the petitioner, is the individual who 
is credited with doing "a lot of the writing" for this campaign. 
I have known [the petitioner] since she arrived in this country in 1994. The extraordinary quality of her 
writing work and her extensive experience in the Hispanic advertising market, drew me to team up with 
her in many advertising projects for clients such as AOL and Amtrak. 
Three years ago we started a prolific collaboration as creative directors under the name "El Equipo" - 
The Team. 
Page 8 
Arnold Worldwide entrusted us with the creation of the first print and radio campaign from Amtrak 
targeted exclusively at the Hispanic market. The client praised our creativity and the ads appeared in 
many newspapers and radio stations throughout the U.S. Amtrak told us that it was one of the most 
successful campaigns they have ever run. 
The record, however, contains no information from senior officials at Amtrak to corroborate the preceding 
assertion. 
We accept that the petitioner is an effective advertisement copy writer, but there is no evidence indicating that 
the petitioner's impact on the industry extends beyond her immediate employers and their clients. Many of 
the witness letters describe the petitioner as a talented creative writer, but the information provided is not 
adequate to demonstrate that the petitioner's individual contributions have significantly influenced the film or 
advertising industries. The issue here is not the skill level, professional experience, or educational 
qualifications of the petitioner, but, rather, whether any of her past endeavors would qualify as a contribution 
of major significance in her field. In this case, the record does not indicate the extent of the petitioner's 
influence on other writerslfilmmakers outside of her immediate circle of collaborators. 
We cannot ignore that all of the letters of support were from individuals affiliated with creative projects 
involving the petitioner. With regard to the personal recommendation of individuals with ties to the 
petitioner, the source of the recommendations is a highly relevant consideration. Such letters are not first- 
hand evidence that the petitioner has earned sustained acclaim for her contributions outside of the 
organizations with which she is affiliated. If the petitioner's reputation is primarily limited to those with 
whom she has worked, then she has not achieved national or international acclaim regardless of the expertise 
of her witnesses. An individual with sustained national or international acclaim should be able to produce 
ample unsolicited materials reflecting that acclaim. In conclusion, we find that the documentation presented in 
regard to this criterion is not adequate to support a finding that the petitioner's work as creative writer is 
nationally or internationally acclaimed throughout the film or advertising industries as a major contribution. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
This particular criterion is more appropriate for visual artists (such as sculptors and painters) rather than for 
advertisement copy writers such as the petitioner. The ten criteria in the regulations are designed to cover 
different areas; not every criterion will apply to every occupation. Given that the petitioner is a copy writer in 
the advertising industry, the petitioner would not satisfy this criterion simply by demonstrating that her work 
has been featured in the print or broadcast media. 
Documentation in the record indicates that the alien is the beneficiary of an approved 0-1 nonimmigrant visa 
petition. However, extraordinary ability in the nonimmigrant context means distinction, which is not the 
same as sustained national or international acclaim. Section 101(a)(46) of the Act explicitly modifies the 
criteria for the 0-1 extraordinary ability classification in such a way that makes the nonirnmigrant 0-1 criteria 
less restrictive for a beneficiary in the arts, and thus less restrictive than the criteria for immigrant classification 
pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
The approval of an 0-1 nonimmigrant visa petition on behalf of a given alien does not in any way compel CIS 
to approve a subsequent visa petition under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act on behalf of that same alien. Each 
petition must be adjudicated on its own merits based on the evidence submitted to support that petition. 
Furthermore, there is no statute, regulation, or binding precedent that requires the approval of an immigrant 
visa petition under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act when the alien already holds an 0-1 nonimmigrant visa. 
The AAO is not required to approve applications or petitions where eligibility has not been demonstrated, 
merely because of prior approvals that may have been erroneous. See, e.g. Matter of Church of Scientology 
Intl., 19 I&N Dec. 593, 597 (Comm. 1988). 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate that the 
alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim, is one of the small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor, and that the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she meets at least three 
of the criteria that must be satisfied to establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself as a creative writer to such an 
extent that she may be said to have achieved sustained national or intemational 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 the national or intemational level. Therefore, the petitioner has 
not established eligbility 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. 9 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.