dismissed EB-1A Case: Fashion Model

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 5199705 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JUNE 2, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner , a fashion model , seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. 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 the Petitioner did not 
satisfy any of the ten initial evidentiary criteria , of which she must meet at least three . 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova review , we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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. 
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 his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient 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). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) allows a petitioner 
to submit comparable material if he or she is able to demonstrate that the standards at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) do not readily apply to the individual's occupation. 
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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record reflects that the Petitioner has worked as a model in Venezuela and the United States in 
advertising campaigns for food, fashion, and beaut brands, in editorials in men's ma azines, and as 
a co-host and model on television shows such as'---------~-------~-___,,...... 
.__ _______ __. andl I The Petitioner asserts that her "ability to excel as both a 
commercial and television model" demonstrates her extraordinary ability as one who is among "the 
top percentage" of the field. 
A. Comparable Evidence 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) allows for comparable evidence if the listed criteria do not 
readily apply to a petitioner's occupation. 1 A petitioner should explain why she has not submitted 
evidence that would satisfy at least three of the criteria set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), as well as 
why the evidence she has included is "comparable" to that required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 2 
Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how her evidence establishes that the criteria do not readily 
apply to fashion models and why she cannot off er evidence that meets at least three of the criteria. 
Furthermore, as discussed later, the Petitioner claimed to meet five criteria without the submission of 
comparable evidence, including lesser awards under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). published material 
under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), judging under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), leading or critical role 
under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii), and high salary under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix). In fact, the 
Petitioner asserts to only satisfying the criteria relating to artistic display under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(vii) and commercial success under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(x) through comparable 
evidence, discussed below. Moreover, the Petitioner did not show that models cannot present evidence 
relating to the other criteria, such as memberships under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii), original 
contributions under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), and scholarly articles under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi). 
The fact that the Petitioner did not provide documentation that fulfills at least three criteria is not 
1 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form I-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADJ 1-14 12 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. 
2 Id. 
2 
evidence that she could not do so. For these reasons, the Petitioner did not establish that she qualifies 
for two criteria, as well as other criteria, through the submission of comparable evidence. 
B. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that she has 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). 3 
The Director found that the Petitioner submitted evidence relating to six of the ten initial evidentiary 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) but did not establish that she met any of them. On appeal, the 
Petitioner asserts that she meets seven criteria, relating to lesser nationally or internationally 
recognized awards, published materials in major media, judging the work of others, artistic display, 
leading or critical role, high salary, and commercial success in the performing arts. After reviewing 
all the evidence in the record, we find that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that she meets at least 
three criteria. 
Documentation of the individual's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
The Petitioner maintains that she meets this criterion based on her receipt of an award from the Stars 
of Venezuela Foundation. The Petitioner previously submitted her award letter and information about 
the organization. The award letter indicates the Petitioner was selected for the Stars of Venezuela 
Award in the cate~.~------------------~ to be awarded on 
I 12015, in L___J Venezuela. Information from the Stars of Venezuela Organization 
indicates it is involved in artist representation and promotion through "the production and organization 
of shows, music festivals, tourism and food festivals." 
In support of her claim that the Stars of Venezuela award is a nationally recognized award for 
excellence in the Venezuelan modeling industry, the Petitioner also provided letters froml I I I of the Stars of Venezuela Foundation. In her first letter she states that the award 
recognizes "personalities of the artistic, sporting, cultural, social, political and business media in 
Venezuela ... who ... have achieved meritorious labor for the development of this country, becoming 
a role model .... " The letter indicates that winners are determined by "a large panel of judges" and 
that the award "has the greatest credibility and presti e in this country." The letter lists a number of 
award recipients including Venezuelan actors and I I The letter is 
accompanied by articles about.__ ____ ___. and ~---- from www.imdb.com and 
www.nytimes.com which, however, do not contain an[ information regarding whether they were Stars 
of Venezuela award recipients. In her second letter,_ I indicates that the Petitioner received 
the award based upon "[h ]er constant appearances on television, fashion shows and editorials. 
3 We note that the Director determined that the Petitioner initially submitted evidence related to a major, internationally 
recognized award at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) but did not satisfy that criterion. On appeal, the Petitioner does not contest this 
issue, rather she asse1is that the evidence related only to the lesser awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
3 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides two additional letters from I . In a letter dated 2016 she 
indicates that in the Petitioner's award category, a judging panel made up of professionals "renowned 
in the arts" considered "all professional models working in or from Venezuela." In a letter dated 2019, 
I !provides that the award recognized the Petitioner's professional achievements, such as her 
work "as a host and model of the international show I I" that "[t]he selection criteria of 
our award are based on the achievements, contributions and professional development of each of the 
nominees to the different categories in each year," and that the 1·udges included singerl I 
I I columnist I . I and model scout ._I ____ __._ 
Although I . Is letters refer to the award as "a tremendous feat" and "of greatest credibility and 
prestige," they do not show that the field recognizes the Stars of Venezuela Award as a national or 
international award for excellence. Moreover, the Petitioner did not offer supporting evidence, such 
as widespread media coverage of the award in major newspapers or other evidence showing the 
award's recognition for excellence in the field. The Petitioner provided a press release from the 
website of La Patilla which does not mention her, announcing an upcoming Stars of Venezuela Award 
gala in[==:]2015 at which the music groupl lwill perform, and printouts from Similar Web 
regarding the "traffic overview" for Lapatilla.com indicating that it has 11.9 million total visits. 
However, the Petitioner did not demonstrate the significance of the viewing statistics or explain how 
such information reflects status as major media. Further, one submitted publicity release is not 
sufficient to establish that the Stars of Venezuela award winners receive a level of media coverage that 
is commensurate with a nationally or internationally recognized award in the modeling industry. 
The Petitioner submitted little background information regarding the Stars of Venezuela awards, such 
as a complete list of all the award categories and the criteria used to grant the prizes or awards. In 
addition, it is not clear how many awards ceremonies take place annually. The submitted article from 
La Palilla, pertaining to a different gala than that at which the Petitioner was recognized, indicates 
that there are multiple award ceremonies each year. The limited background information provided 
here is insufficient to establish the level of national or international recognition associated with the 
Stars of Venezuela Award, and there is no documentary evidence showing that the Petitioner's specific 
Star of Venezuela Award was recognized beyond the presenting organization and, therefore, 
commensurate with nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the 
field. Without independent, objective evidence which establishes that this award is a nationally or 
internationally recognized award for modeling, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that she meets this 
criterion. 
For the reasons discussed, the Petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Published material 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. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
The Petitioner provided articles from several Venezuelan newspapers in support of this criterion. The 
Director found articles from Meridiano and El Nuevo Pais to be deficient because they do not include 
the required author. In addition, the Petitioner provided articles from the newspapers La Region and 
La Vaz. However, she did not submit supporting evidence to show that La Region qualifies as a 
4 
professional or major trade publication or other major media. Further, the Petitioner did not provide 
evidence indicating that the print edition of La Vaz qualifies as major media. 4 The Petitioner offered 
printouts from Similar Web regarding the "traffic overview" for Diariolavoz.net indicating that the 
online version of the publication has 320,600 total visits. 
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner did not establish that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the individual's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge 
of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which 
class[fication is sought. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) 
In order to meet this criterion, the Petitioner must show that she participated "as a judge of the work 
of others in the same or an allied field of specialization." The Petitioner initially submitted a certificate 
of apeecirion dated November 19, 2016, for her participation as "an honorable Judge" in the 2016 
Miss Juniors International pageant inl I Florida, signed by the pageant director 
She also included photographs of herself and two unidentified persons in front of a 
promotional banner for the event. She farther provided a letter from I I of I I 
l I in D Florida, that provides some bjckgrolund information about the pageant, for instance, 
that the winner is "selected to represent the Juniors Athletic Club of Argentina" and that 
"[ s ]everal models compete at a chance to win the competition ... of which 26 go on to the finals 
before a single winner is selected," based upon criteria including charisma, artistic talent, and public­
speaking ability. Regarding the Petitioner's participation in the pageant, I I provides that 
the Petitioner was "selected to serve as a member of the selection committee because she is a 
successful model with many years of professional experience in the industry." He indicates that the 
Petitioner "served as a jury member in each step of the competition, including selecting the winner .. 
. . " He states that as member of "the jury panel selecting the winner, her role included evaluating each 
one of the contestants who made it to the finals and presented her case during the live event." 
Upon review, we find insufficient evidence to establish that the Petitioner actually participated as a 
judge in the competition. Although I I states that the Petitioner "was crucial to our 
competition's success and professional outlook," the record does not document the manner in which 
I I is authorized to represent or speak on behalf of the Missc=]Juniors International 
pageant, nor does it contain evidence from the competition's organizers about the 2016 MissD 
Juniors International pageant showing the competitors judged by the Petitioner and the name of the 
finalists and winner she specifically selected. Merely submitting a certificate of appreciation and a 
statement asserting that the Petitioner judged the work of others without evidence showing who she 
judged, and their field of specialization is insufficient to establish eligibility for this criterion. If 
testimonial evidence lacks specificity, detail, or credibility, there is a greater need for a petitioner to 
submit corroborative evidence. Matter of Y-B-, 21 I&N Dec. 1136 (BIA 1998). Here, there is no 
documentary evidence showing the Petitioner's specific assessments and the names of the models 
whose work she evaluated. For these reasons, we find the evidence submitted insufficient to verify 
the Petitioner's participation as a judge in the competition 
4 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 7 (indicating that evidence of published material in 
professional or major trade publications or in other major media publications should establish that the circulation (on-line 
or in print) is high compared to other circulation statistics). 
5 
The Director determined that the above-referenced materials do not meet this criterion, because they do 
not address how the Petitioner "is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field 
of endeavor and that [the Petitioner] enjoys sustained national or international acclaim." On appeal, the 
Petitioner asserts that the Director went beyond the plain language of the regulation in considering the 
nature of her judging duties. We agree. If the Petitioner submits evidence that she participated in judging 
of the work of others in the same or allied field of specialization, we will conclude that the evidence 
satisfies the plain language of this criterion. 5 For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner did not present 
such evidence. 
In light of the above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii) 
The Petitioner asserts that she meets the plain language of the criterion through the documentation 
submitted of"her work at artistic showcases through fashion exhibitions, runway shows, and print and 
commercial advertisements because these are places or events where something may be shown or 
performed." In the alternative, the Petitioner requests that we consider that documentation as 
"comparable evidence" in support of this criterion. The Director found that "because the evidence 
does not indicate that [the Petitioner's] works were displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases 
( virtual or otherwise)" the Petitioner did not satisfy the evidentiary requirements of this criterion. 
Upon review, the Petitioner has not established that the evidence submitted represents a display of her 
work at artistic exhibitions or showcases. The Petitioner provided evidence of her having been a host 
and model in the entertainment showsl I.__ ______ __. andl I 
She also submitted evidence of her having appeared and been featured as a model in print and online 
advertisin cam ai ns for crmpanir including! II 11 I I l I I I J , andl l and in editorials in the men's 
magazines.__ ___ __., ,__ _ ___, and I I. Although the screenshots provided of those 
entertainment programs and the tear-sheets or copies submitted of those advertisements and editorials 
show that the Petitioner's work was displayed on television and in print and digital media, the language 
of this criterion specifically requires display of the Petitioner's work at "artistic exhibitions or 
showcases" ( emphasis added). The documentary evidence the Petitioner submitted was insufficient 
to establish that the catalogues, lookbooks, magazines, and TV programs in which her work was 
displayed can be considered "artistic" in nature, 6 as required under this criterion, as opposed to 
commercial media. 
5 The nature of the Petitioner's judging duties would be more relevant to an examination of the totality of the evidence. As 
discussed above, where a petitioner meets at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), 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, 596 F.3d at 1115. 
6 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 9-10. 
6 
In light of the above, the Petitioner has not established that she satisfies the plain language 
requirements of this evidentiary criterion or that the evidence on which she relies is comparable to the 
evidence required by the criterion. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office 
receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(x) 
This criterion focuses on volume of sales and box office receipts as a measure of a petitioner's 
commercial success in the performing arts. As evidence for this criterion, the Petitioner presented the 
above-referenced documentation indilcatingl that she appeared in advertisements for companies 
including I 11 I and ~-----~ and information about these 
companies. To addition sbe or?ivided media articles discussing the television programs ~I ----~ 
I l I JI lin which she appeared as a host and model. On appeal, 
the Petitioner argues that "as a Model working in the field of television and advertising, box office 
receipts and video sales are not always available to document [the Petitioner's] commercial success 
because several of her productions are broadcast in real time to viewers on a television screen and 
through other media." The Petitioner farther states that she submitted "evidence of the revenue and 
profits for several of the distinguished organizations and establishments for which [the Petitioner] has 
played a lead and critical role in their commercial success." 
While the evidence established that the Petitioner has appeared in advertisements for various 
companies and television programming, she has not shown that the success of those companies and 
television shows was attributable to her specific work as a model or television host. Furthermore, she 
has not demonstrated that her televised performances have attracted substantial audiences or that her 
advertising work generated significant sales. In order to meet this criterion, the evidence must show 
that the volume of sales and box office receipts reflect a petitioner's commercial successes relative to 
others involved in similar pursuits in the performing arts. 7 Here, the record does not include evidence 
identifying the Petitioner as having commercial successes relative to other performing artists. Nor is 
the evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the commercial successes of the aforementioned companies 
and television programs in which she appeared were mainly because of the Petitioner's work. 8 In light 
of the above, the Petitioner has not established that she satisfies the plain language requirements of 
this evidentiary criterion or that the evidence on which she relies is comparable to the evidence 
required by the criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
We find that the Petitioner does not satisfy the criteria relating to awards, published material, judging, 
artistic display, and commercial success. Although she submits evidence for two additional criteria 
on appeal, relating to leading or critical role at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii) and high salary at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(ix), we need not reach these additional grounds. As the Petitioner cannot fulfill the 
initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), we reserve these issues. 9 
7 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, supra, at 11-12. 
8 For example, with respect to the Venezuelan and U.S. enteitainment programs in which she appeared, the Petitioner has 
not shown that their television ratings or viewing audience increased significantly once she joined their programs. 
9 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach). 
7 
Accordingly, we need not provide the type of final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 
F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise that we have reviewed the record in the aggregate, 
concluding that it does not support a finding that the Petitioner has established the acclaim and 
recognition required for the classification sought. 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held 
that even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of her work is indicative of the required sustained national or 
international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )(l)(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in the field, and 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). 
Although the Petitioner has appeared in advertisements for various companies and television 
programming, the record does not contain sufficient evidence establishing that she is among the upper 
echelon in her field. 
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. 
8