dismissed EB-1A Case: Cultural Direction

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG . 28, 2024 In Re: 33277950 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a cultural director, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in the arts. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A) , 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A) . This first 
preference classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their 
extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have 
been recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
satisfied at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria, as required, she did not show her sustained national 
or international acclaim and demonstrate she is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of 
endeavor. The matter is now before us on appeal. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence . 
Matter ofChawathe , 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc. , 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(1 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to individuals with 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 , provided that the individual seeks to enter the United States to continue 
work in the area of extraordinary ability, and the individual's entry into the United States will 
substantially benefit prospectively the United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of achievements in the field through a one-time achievement (that is, a 
major, internationally recognized award) or qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the 
ten categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published 
material in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) 
( discussing a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination); see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
Because the Petitioner has not claimed or established she received a major, internationally recognized 
award, she must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)­
(x). The Director determined the Petitioner met three of the claimed evidentiary criteria relating to 
published material at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), judging at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), and leading or 
critical role at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). However, the Director concluded the Petitioner did not 
show she garnered sustained national or international acclaim and her achievements have been 
recognized in the field of expertise, demonstrating she is one of that small percentage who has risen 
to the very top of the field. 
On appeal, the Petitioner argues that her evidence in the aggregate establishes her eligibility as an 
individual of extraordinary ability and that the Director's decision "did not provide specific reasons as 
to why it found that [the Petitioner's] work is not consistent with being among the small percentage at 
the top of the field or having a 'career of acclaimed work."' Below, we will evaluate the totality of 
the evidence based on the documentation presented to the Director in the context of the final merits 
determination. 1 
As the Director concluded that the Petitioner submitted the requisite initial evidence, we will determine 
whether she has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, her sustained national or 
international acclaim, 2 she is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and 
her achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. In a final merits 
determination, we analyze an individual's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to 
determine if their successes are sufficient to demonstrate that they have extraordinary ability in the 
field of endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also 
Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 3 In this matter, we determine the Petitioner has not shown her 
eligibility. 
1 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
2 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(A)(l) (stating that such acclaim must be maintained and providing Black's 
Law Dictionary's definition of"sustain" is "to support or maintain, especially over a long period of time ... To persist in 
making (an effort) over a long period of time"). 
3 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(B)(2) (instructing that USCTS officers should consider the petition in its 
entirety to detennine eligibility according to the standard- sustained national or international acclaim and the achievements 
2 
As it relates to the Petitioner's background, according to the initial cover letter: 
[The Petitioner] is a skilled Cultural Director who has demonstrated her abilities across 
a myriad of mediums, including art exhibitions and live musical performances. As a 
result of [her] superior skill set, she has developed a distinguished reputation as a 
Cultural Director .... 
[The Petitioner] has performed in a leading or critical role as Cultural Director in the 
role of President for the Foundation for Culture of I I The 
Foundation is dedicated to promoting and preserving the cultural identity ofl I 
with the vision of positioning the city as a cultural destination of national and 
international significance. . . . [The Petitioner] served as the President of the 
Foundation for nearly a decade. 
Her work has also been displayed throughout her career at artistic exhibitions and 
showcases for wide and diverse audiences. These displays have included art 
exhibitions and musical performances that have been the culmination of [the 
Petitioner's] work as a Cultural Director. Examples include the _______ 
exhibition and restoration of the I Icanvas, as well as the exhibition of 
the Collection, 1999, byl Iat the I I 
I I . . . [The Petitioner] has also worked on artistic showcases like 
thel I Festival ... at the _________ 
[The Petitioner] was invited to and actually served as a judge during the March 2016 
auditions for the I .. As a judge, [the Petitioner] 
evaluated the work of other professionals in the field by assessing the musical skills of 
the candidates and their knowledge of the I I musical repertoire. 
Finally, her contributions to the field, as well as her accomplishments as a Cultural 
Director, have earned the Petitioner si nificant ress covera e from major 
publications. The article, 
published by prominently features [the Petitioner] and 
her opinions on the _____ As such, news of [the Petitioner] and her 
work as a Cultural Director have reached a wider audience. 
have been recognized in the field of expertise, indicating that the person is one of that small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor). 
3 
In the appeal brief, the Petitioner highlights her career achievements as follows: 
• [[The Petitioner] presented evidence that she was the Director of Culture for I I 
from 1996 to 1999. She was then the President of the Foundation for Culture 
of from 1999 to 2008. In these roles, she held a lead and critical 
role given that she was responsible for ensuring the historical heritage and cultural 
management in Venezuela. 
• From 1999 to 2008, [the Petitioner] presented evidence that she has been published in 
major publications due to her extraordinary ability as a Cultural Director. ... [O]ne of 
the publications in which [the Petitioner] was published, I I is a major 
publication among the others. 
• [The Petitioner] helped install the exhibition of in 2007. 
• [The Petitioner] presented evidence that she served as a judge of the work of her peers 
in 2016. 
As discussed further below, the Petitioner has served in leadership pos1t10ns for two cultural 
organizations inl Ireceived media coverage in the "City" section ofl Icoordinated 
visual and performing arts events inl I evaluated the skills of candidates auditioning for a 
music group inl Iand been praised by others in the field. However, in considering the totality 
of the evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her achievements are reflective of a "career 
of acclaimed work in the field" as contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 
1990). Nor has the Petitioner shown that she has sustained acclaim as a cultural director after 2008.4 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not established that she has risen to that small percentage at the very 
top of the field of endeavor and garnered national or international acclaim. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), 
(3). The commentary for the proposed regulations implementing section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act 
provides 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). Here, the Petitioner 
has not sufficiently documented a career that meets these very high standards. 
As evidence of her leading roles, the Petitioner provided a letter from D-M-M-D-C-, President of the 
Foundation of Culture of stating that the Petitioner served as the organization's 
President from 1999 to 2008 and that "projects executed during her management" included: "Festival 
of the Arts,I I International Fair, Festival, International Book Fair, [andll I 
Program in Municipal Schools." Likewise, a letter from D-M-, General Director ofl I 
publishing house, 5 asserted that the Petitioner's "direction made possible the location of works, loans 
4 See 6 USC1S Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(A)(l) (instrncting that USCIS officers should determine if "the person 
continues to maintain a comparable level of acclaim in the field of expe1tise since the person was originally afforded that 
recognition. A person may, for example. have achieved national or international acclaim in the past but then failed to 
maintain a comparable level of acclaim thereafter."). 
5 D-M-'s letter noted that. as the former Executive Director of the in the 1990s and 
4 
of paintings in state collections, restoration of original fabrics and frames, such as the printing of an 
educational brochure for children and the organization of the exhibition in spaces of the centenary 
He also indicated that he and the Petitioner "proceeded with the 
restoration of a canvas of monumental dimensions by the painter that crowned the 
ceiling of the and that "together with a group of architects and 
restorers," their project contributed to "the recovery of one of the most important murals in the 
country." 
Although the Petitioner served as Director of Culture forl Ifrom 1996 to 1999 and 
then as President of the Foundation for Culture of Ifrom 1999 to 2008, she did not 
document roles for any other organizations or establishments after 2008 to demonstrate her sustained 
acclaim. Moreover, while the Petitioner's local art and cultural work was reported in the "City" section 
ofl I the Petitioner's evidence does not indicate that her work received a level of attention 
rendering her nationally or internationally acclaimed or otherwise placing her among that small 
percentage at the very top of the field. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3). USCIS has long held that even 
athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the statutory standards for 
classification as an individual of "extraordinary ability." Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953, 954 
(Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner did not establish that her roles for two cultural 
organizations in I Iresulted in widespread acclaim in her field, attracted significant attention 
from throughout her field, elevated her to the very top of the field, or was otherwise indicative of 
sustained national or international acclaim. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2), (3). 
Regarding media coverage, the Petitioner provided numerous articles in the "City" section of 
__ reporting on her work inl I from 1996 until 2008. 6 The Petitioner, however, has not 
provided news coverage about her from any other media source besides I I She has not 
demonstrated that her press coverage in a local section of a single newspaper, without any further 
media reporting about her since 2008, is consistent with the sustained national or international acclaim 
necessary for this highly restrictive classification. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. Nor has the 
Petitioner shown how her overall media coverage is indicative of a level of success with being among 
that small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
Here, the Petitioner has not established that her media coverage in only one newspaper (limited to the 
mid-1990s until 2008) reflects a "career of acclaimed work in the field" or a "very high standard ... 
to present more extensive documentation than that required." See H.R. Rep. No. at 59 and 56 Fed. 
Reg. at 30704. 
As it pertains to the Petitioner's service as a judge of the work of others, an evaluation of the 
significance of her experience is appropriate to determine if such evidence indicates the required 
extraordinary ability for this highly restrictive classification. See Kazarian, 596 F. 3d at 1121-22. The 
Petitioner presented a letter from Dr. J-C-R-, "founder of the I I 
Istating: "In March 2016 the auditions for the creation of thel 
I I began. The work consisted of evaluating the musical skills of the participants and the 
2000s, he worked with the Petitioner while she was serving as "the Director of Culture for Iduring the 
years 1996-1999" and when she "later became President of the Foundation for Culture of II 999-2008." 
6 We agree with the Director thatl is a form of major media. The Petitioner asserts on appeal that "she has been 
published in major publications," but has only submitted articles inl land its circulation information. 
5 
I 
knowledge in the execution of each instrument, as well as the repertoire .... The Iwas made 
up of 11 people; [the Petitioner] was invited as a juror to evaluate the row of cellos." Here, the 
Petitioner has not shown that her judging experience involved evaluating the work of nationally or 
internationally renowned cellists rather than local I I musicians whose reputations are not 
documented in the record. Furthermore, the Petitioner has not established that this single instance of 
judging auditions for the in 2016 contributes to a finding that she 
has a career of acclaimed work in the field of cultural direction or demonstrates the required "sustained 
national or international acclaim." See H.R. Rep. No. 101-723 at 59 and section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Act. She did not show, for example, how her experience in evaluating cellists for thel 
compares to others at the very top of her field. Similarly, the record does not show that the Petitioner 
garnered national or international acclaim for her service as a judge. Without evidence that sets her 
apart from others in the field, such as evidence that she has a consistent history ofjudging recognized, 
acclaimed artists, performers, or experts in her field, the Petitioner has not shown that her judging 
experience places her among that small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
The Petitioner also provided recommendation letters praising her for her talents, skills, and capabilities 
as a cultural director. For instance, D-M- indicated that the Petitioner contributed to "the organization 
of the exhibition of emblematic works of ______ in which works by the painter were 
reproduced on canvas and together with a catalog the exhibition was circulated through schools, 
athenaeums, and houses of culture in thel !State. A program that made it possible to bring 
works of art closer to children and young students with limited resources." Although the letters 
commend the Petitioner on her art and culture projects in I Ithey do not 
contain sufficient information and explanation, nor does the record include adequate corroborating 
evidence, to show that she is viewed by the overall field, rather than by a solicited few, as being among 
the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor. Moreover, the letters do not establish 
that her specific contributions are indicative of a career of acclaimed work in the field and the requisite 
sustained national or international acclaim. See H.R. Rep. No. at 59 and section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Act. 
Furthermore, while the Petitioner was involved in the planning and coordination of festivals, concerts, 
and other artistic events inl (such as the city's International Fair, Venezuelan! !Festival, 
and _____ exhibition) from the mid-1990s until 2008, simply organizing such events does 
not automatically place her at the very top of the field. She did not demonstrate, for example, that her 
specific planning and coordination work garnered a level of attention consistent with having sustained 
national or international acclaim or placed her among that small percentage who has risen to the very 
top of the field of endeavor. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3). Nor is there evidence indicating that the 
Petitioner has maintained involvement in directing comparable activities in I I or any other 
major city after 2008. She therefore that not demonstrated that whatever level of acclaim she received 
in the field of cultural direction has been sustained since 2008. 
The record as a whole, including the evidence discussed above, does not establish the Petitioner's 
eligibility for the benefit sought. Here, the Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, 
intended for individuals already at the top of their respective fields, rather than those progressing 
toward the top. Price, 20 I&N Dec. at 954 (concluding that even major league level athletes do not 
automatically meet the statutory standards for classification as an individual of "extraordinary 
6 
ability,"); Visinscaia, 4 F. Supp. 3d at 131 (internal quotation marks omitted) (finding that the 
extraordinary ability designation is "extremely restrictive by design,"); Hamal v. Dep 't ofHomeland 
Sec. (Hamal 11), No. 19-cv-2534, 2021 WL 2338316, at *5 (D.D.C. June 8, 2021), aff'd, 2023 WL 
1156801 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 31, 2023) (determining that EB-1 visas are "reserved for a very small 
percentage of prospective immigrants"). See also Hamal v. Dep 't ofHomeland Sec. (Hamal 1), No. 
19-cv-2534, 2020 WL 2934954, at *1 (D.D.C. June 3, 2020) (citing Kazarian, 596 at 1122 (upholding 
denial of petition of a published theoretical physicist specializing in non-Einsteinian theories of 
gravitation) (stating that "[c]ourts have found that even highly accomplished individuals fail to win 
this designation")); Lee v. Ziglar, 237 F. Supp. 2d 914, 918 (N.D. Ill. 2002) (finding that "arguably 
one of the most famous baseball players in Korean history" did not qualify for visa as a baseball 
coach). 
After consideration of the totality of the evidence, including the Petitioner's leadership positions for 
two cultural organizations inl Ipublished material about her in the "City" section ofl I 
her coordination of art and culture events and programs in I I her single instance of judging 
candidates auditioning for a music group in I I as well as the opinions of her colleagues in the 
field, we conclude that this documentation does not sufficiently establish her sustained national or 
international acclaim or show that she is among that small percentage who has risen to the very top of 
the field of endeavor. Nor does the Petitioner's evidence demonstrate that she continues to maintain 
a comparable level of acclaim in her field of expertise after 2008. While the Petitioner's 
documentation indicates that she received media attention from one newspaper for her activities in 
I I from 1996 until 2008, she has not shown that her achievements are indicative of the required 
sustained acclaim or that they are consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. See H.R. Rep. No. at 59; see also section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. In 
addition, the Petitioner has not otherwise demonstrated that she has garnered national or international 
acclaim in her field and that she is one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of the 
field of endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3). 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her eligibility as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7