dismissed EB-1A Case: Filmmaking

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
InRe : 18851417 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 30, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, an independent filmmaker, 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 while the Petitioner met 
the initial evidence requirement for the requested classification, the record did not establish that he 
enjoyed sustained national or international acclaim and was among the small percentage of those at 
the top of his field. 
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) 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 pet1t10ner can demonstrate 
international 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 criteria 
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 
The Petitioner is an independent filmmaker whose credits include theatrical feature films, short films, 
and documentary projects released in his native country of Zimbabwe. The record reflects that he has 
also directed and written concepts for music videos. He intends to continue writing, editing and 
directing films in the United States if his petition is granted. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that he has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, he must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director found that the Petitioner met four of the evidentiary criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) relating to lesser awards, published material about him and his work, 
his participation as a judge of the work of others, and display of his work in the field at artistic 
exhibitions or showcases. 
The record reflects that the Petitioner's short film I I received a~------~Award ) 
I ~ for in 2013 awarded b the National Arts Council 
of Zimbabwe. This film also earned him the.__ _______ -r--,_____,Award at thel I 
International Film Festival! lin 2011, and was screened at the that same year. In 2017, he 
produced! I, a feature film expanding on the original short film by the same name, which 
won multiple awards and was also screened at then and at several additional festivals. The record 
also contains evidence demonstrating that he wo~ I at C=1 in 2006, as well as the 
I lforl lin 2016. Accordingly, we agree that the submitted evidence establishes 
that the Petitioner meets the awards and display criteria. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted numerous articles published in major media discussing his work 
and accomplishments, as well as evidence that he judged the work of others in his field as the head 
juror for thel I We concur with the Director's determination that the Petitioner also satisfies the 
judging and published material criteria. Therefore, the Petitioner has established that he fulfills at 
2 
least three regulatory criteria, and we will evaluate the totality of the evidence in the context of the 
final merits determination below. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
In a final merits determination, we examine and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine 
whether the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small 
percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and that his achievements have been recognized in 
the field through extensive documentation. Here, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient evidence 
that he meets that standard. 
The Petitioner is an independent filmmaker who has also worked as a music video writer and director. 
The record as a whole reflects that he has become a respected figure in Zimbabwe's film industry, but 
does not demonstrate that his 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). 
Preliminarily, we note that on appeal, the Petitioner submits a copy of an updated Form I-140, 
Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, that updates his claimed job title to 'I I Film Maker." 
The Petitioner indicates that the Director unfairly considered the Petitioner in the context of 
filmmakers as a whole, when in fact he should be compared to the I lof I I 
I I when determining whether he is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of 
endeavor. The Petitioner requests that we accept this new job title and associated duties, and 
supplements the appeal with additional evidence for consideration in support of this assertion. 
While the Petitioner's assertions are noted, we will not consider these new claims in our review of the 
appeal. The Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have 
been satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 
If significant changes are made to the initial request for approval, the Petitioner must file a new petition 
rather than seek approval of a petition that is not supported by the facts in the record. 1 Although the 
Petitioner attempts to submit an updated Form I-140 to reflect its change in job title, he is not permitted 
to make material changes to a petition, to its claims, or to the evidence in an effort to make an apparently 
deficient petition conform to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) requirements. See 
Matter of lzummi, 22 I&N Dec. 169, 175 (Assoc. Comm'r 1998). The Petitioner's initial filing does not 
describe the job title as I O I film maker" or provide any details of the! ~ field 
of endeavor. Consequently, we will only consider the claims and evidence the Petitioner presented before 
the Director. 
The record shows that the Petitioner has worked on four feature films, several short films, and 
approximately 40 short documentary videos since 2006, usually as a writer and director. Although 
this demonstrates the Petitioner's lengthy career in filmmaking, longevity in the industry, however, is 
not the same as sustained national or international acclaim. 
1 Rather than file a new petition, the Petitioner seeks to amend the cunent petition on appeal. The Petitioner stated that 
"[s]ince we are not filing a new 1-140, we are not including a new filing fee since [the Petitioner] has previously paid it in 
his original filing." 
3 
Based on the submitted evidence, the Petitioner is best known for his feature film,I I which 
he comp)eted in 2]117. The Petitioner's film on which he served as writer director and editor won 
I _Film at the and Feature at the Film 
Festival in 2017, as well as.__ ____ _. at the.__ _____ ~International Film Festival in 
I lin 2018. Although his receipt of these awards received press coverage in outlets such as 
The Herald and H-Metro, such media coverage does not establish that winning such awards results in 
sustained national or international acclaim for the award recipient. While the Petitioner received his 
awards forl I in 2017 and 2018, the record does not demonstrate that he directed another 
feature film or received any additional nominations or awards for his film and music video projects in 
subsequent years. Therefore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he has achieved sustained 
national or international acclaim in the field. 
The Petitioner also submitted evidence demonstrating that in late 2019, he was selected to participate 
in an American television documentary entitled 1~---~t' a series that featured[] filmmakers from 
D countries, of all whom werd I The series consisted otO episodes, with one episode 
dedicated to each filmmaker, and the Petitioner was selected to represent Zimbabwe. The director of 
the project,! I indicated in a letter that in addition to featuring the Petitioner in the 
series, she also selected him to be a special guest at thel IFilm Festival inl I 2020, 
which was ultimately cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 
The Petitioner relies on this project as evidence of his ongoing career and his sustained acclaim in the 
field, noting that his invitation to participate in the series and attend thel I Film Festival as 
an "honored guest" demonstrated continued interest in his work. He further noted that had he attended 
this festival, he undoubtedly would have received significant media attention, both internationally and 
in Zimbabwe. 2 While we note that the Petitioner's selection to participate in this project is an honor, 
we note that he was simply the subject of another filmmaker's project and not engaged in the writing, 
directing, or editing of the series. Moreover, the record is devoid of evidence demonstrating that this 
project was actually completed and televised, give~ l's indication that this was a "current" 
project at the time her letter was submitted. We are unable to determine whether the segment featuring 
the Petitioner in this series was actually completed, and if so, whether it highlighted his film 
achievements and his impact upon the industry, or merely described his talents and abilities as a 
filmmaker. Absent such evidence, his selection to appear in this series does not establish that he was 
one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of their field as contemplated by Kazarian. 
The Petitioner was awarded! !Award forl lin 2006, and thell 
I !Award and thd If~ I lin 2011 and 2013, respectively. There is no indication, however, that the Petitioner has since 
2 The record contains minimal evidence pertaining to the6 I fjhr Festival, and we therefore afford minimal 
weight to this assertion. The Petitioner submitt¢...a...kll,er fro .__ ___ ~ the festival's executive director, confirming 
the Petitioner's invitation to attend the festival inl__J2020. He states that the festival, "now in id I, is a globally 
recognized international film festival that thrives to bring creative voices from around the world to the big screen and an 
international audience," and that it has premiered many Oscar-nominated films. Aside from this letter, and a screenshot 
of the ferival's webre noting its cancellation due to COVTD-19, there is no evidence supporting these statements. 
Although.__ __ ___,claims that the festival premiered "many" Oscar-nominated films, he only identified one such film 
by name. The record contains no documentation or other independent evidence corroborating the claims set forth in his 
letter, nor is there evidence demonstrating that the festival is routinely attended by influential industry members or that his 
participation in the festival would have garnered significant media attention as he claims. 
4 
written, directed or produced another short film since the release o~ I in 2011. While these 
awards are admirable and demonstrate his recognition in the area of short filmmaking, standing alone 
they are not evidence that the Petitioner has extraordinary ability as an independent filmmaker whose 
work encompasses a wide range of genres including feature films, short films and documentaries. 
While his awards for his short films are acknowledged, they alone do not establish that the Petitioner 
has sustained national or international acclaim or that he has attained the status as one of that small 
percentage who have risen to the very top of their field of endeavor. 
The Petitioner's work has appeared at several film festivals, which the Director recognized by granting 
the criterion related to artistic display. But the Petitioner has not established the significance of these 
particular festivals or shown that the festival appearances particularly highlighted the Petitioner's 
involvement in the films in a manner that would reflect or contribute to acclaim. Display of the 
Petitioner's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases consists of screenings of his short 
filmsl I and at thec=J in 2006 and 2011, respectively; screening of his music 
video at th tions in 2013; and screening 
of his feature film.__ ___ ~at the in 2018 and th .__ ___ __,Awards Gala in 2019. As it 
is expected that filmmakers would exhibit their artistic work in front of audiences, we will evaluate 
the extent to which the display of the Petitioner's work is reflective of acclaim consistent with this 
classification. 
While this evidence demonstrates that his films received additional recognition in the independent 
film field, the record contains little information regarding these festivals. Although the Petitioner 
submitted evidence demonstrating that 150 films and filmmakers attended thel !Awards 
Gala, this evidence, and the minimal evidence submitted relating to the remaining festivals, does not 
indicate that any of the festivals were attended by influential industry members. Further, the Petitioner 
has not established that the selection of his film for these festivals resulted in significant media 
attention or otherwise resulted in national or international recognition. This evidence falls short of 
representing the Petitioner as one who has established sustained acclaim or that he has attained the 
status as one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of their field of endeavor. 
The record contains comparatively little evidence regarding the Petitioner's other film projects, which 
include numerous documentary shorts for various humanitarian organizations including thel I 
I I and I I As constituted, the record lacks sufficient independent evidence of the 
recognition he received or the exact role he played in these projects. With respect to the 
documentaries, it is unclear when, where or in what capacity these projects were released and how 
they were received by audiences and critics, as man of them were documented in the record solely 
through submission of captioned screenshots. who worked with the Petitioner while 
he performed documentary work for the.__ ______________________ _. 
states that the Petitioner "is a great storyteller with a unique ability to understand project objectives 
and translate them into impactfol stories." However, as noted, the record contains little independent 
evidence of the Petitioner's work on documentary films produced for thel I or other 
humanitarian organizations, or the attention he received for this work, to corroborate its claimed 
impact and influence on the Zimbabwean and international film industries. 
Overall, during his 14-year career in his field, the Petitioner has established that he directed one 
award-winning feature film that garnered him national attention in Zimbabwe when it was first 
5 
released and when screened at international festivals in 2017 and 2018. His previous projects, the 
short filmsl I andl I also garnered some local media coverage in Zimbabwe. 
While these projects are noteworthy accomplishments for the Petitioner as a filmmaker, the evidence 
does not establish that they are reflective of a "career of acclaimed work" or that receiving the 
documented level of recognition for three projects during a 14-year career demonstrates a level of 
success consistent with being among "that small percentage who [has] risen to the very top of the field 
of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
The Petitioner has also submitted testimonial letters that summarize and discuss the Petitioner's 
contributions in the field as a filmmaker. Most of these letters simply recount the Petitioner's career 
history and praise his work rather than offer specific examples of the Petitioner's impact on the field. 
For example,! I Co-Founder ofl I states that "it goes without saying that 
[The Petitioner] has indeed garnered a spot at the top echelon of filmmakers in Zimbabwe and 
internationally." Similarly, a letter froml I a U.S. film producer, discusses his hybrid 
talent as "a director, editor, cinematographer, creative producer, writer, assistant director, and film 
festival jury president," noting that "it is truly unique in this industry for a filmmaker to possess 
extraordinary abilities across different genres of film." I I an actor and filmmaker 
in Zimbabwe, states "I have worked with the likes of Christopher Lee, Sharon Stone, Danny Glover, 
and two time Oscar winner Denzel Washington and Oscar winner Kevin Kline. [The Petitioner] holds 
the same dedication to excellence that I have witnessed in these Hollywood greats." While each of 
these individuals commends the Petitioner's work, they have not established that his work, or any of 
his films, were particularly influential in the Zimbabwean or international film industry such that they 
had an impact of major significance 3 in the overall field that contributed to his national or international 
acclaim. 
In evaluating the Petitioner's evidence, we take into account the probative analysis that experts may 
provide in opinion letters regarding the significance of an individual's contributions of major 
significance. Letters that specifically articulate how a Petitioner's contributions are of major 
significance in the field and their impact on subsequent work add value, while letters that lack specifics 
and simply use hyperbolic language do not. 4 While the referenced letters praise the Petitioner's 
talents, accomplishments, and broad experience, they are not sufficiently detailed to support a 
conclusion that he has made impactfol or influential contributions to his field reflecting a "career of 
acclaimed work in the field" garnering the required sustained national or international 
acclaim. See H.R. Rep. No. at 59 and section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
Regarding the Petitioner's experience judging the work of others, an evaluation of this practice is 
acceptable under Kazarian, 596 F. 3d at 1121-11, to determine if such evidence is indicative of the 
extraordinary ability required for this highly restrictive classification. The record reflects that the 
Beneficiary was the head juror for the~in 2010, which was a 10-day festival where the Petitioner 
and a panel of jurors screened 26 feature films, 18 short films, and 27 documentaries submitted from 
over 20 countries. Although the Petitioner submitted information regarding some of the winning films, 
the record contains no additional information regarding the festival or the manner in which the awards 
3 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 8-9; see also Visinscaia, 4 F. Supp. 3d at 134-35 (upholding 
a finding that a ballroom dancer had not met the original contributions criterion because she did not corroborate her impact 
in the field as a whole). 
4 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, supra, at 9. 
6 
were bestowed, and does not establish that the Petitioner garnered national recogmt10n in the 
field based on his work as a judge in this competition. The record contains minimal background 
information regarding the nature or scope of the 2010 competition, or the level of recognition 
associated with being selected as a judge, and there is no indication that he was selected to serve as a 
judge or juror for similar festivals prior or subsequent to this single appointment. As a result, we 
cannot determine that the Petitioner's judging activities reflect that he is one of that small percentage 
who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
Considered in its totality, the evidence in the record demonstrates that the Beneficiary is a talented 
filmmaker who is well-respected within Zimbabwe based on his broad experience in the film industry. 
While his experience is wide-ranging and includes several notable accomplishments, the Petitioner 
has not shown that his artistic achievements at this point of his career, in any one area or as a whole, 
are indicative of one who has risen to the very top of his field of endeavor with sustained national or 
international acclaim, as required. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2)-(3). 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals 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, after analysis 
of the totality of the evidence, we conclude that the Petitioner has not shown that the significance of 
his 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 )(1 )(A) of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise 
demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered national or international acclaim in the field, and that he 
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). For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated his eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7