dismissed EB-1A Case: Filmmaking

U.S. Departntent of Ilonleland Security 
U S Cltlzenshlp and In~m~grat~on Serwces 
Office of Adnz~t~rstratrve Appeals MS 2090 
Wash~ngton, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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. 5 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned 
to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to 
have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 
9 103.5 for the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided 
your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be 
filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
9 103.5(a)(I)(i). 
V 
Rohn F. Grissom 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center. The petition 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. 4 1153(b)(l)(A), as an 
alien of extraordinary ability in 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 has risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to 
establish that an alien has sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in his or her 
field of expertise are set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. fj 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria 
will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that he 
has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as a filmmaker. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, 
internationally recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation 
outlines ten criteria, at least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the 
sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Page 3 
The petitioner has submitted evidence that presumably is relevant to the following criteria. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
In his August 4, 2006 letter accompanying the petition, counsel indicated that the petitioner had 
received the following "major" awards: 
1. For the short film "Cuando La Luna Esta Llena:" award winner at the Palm Springs 
International Festival of Short Films, IFP Finalist Best Short Films, Best Fiction Film in 
Cityvisions Film Festival, and selected for the Rhode Island International Film Festival, 
Garden State Film Festival, Cenequest San Jose Film Festival, Boston International 
Latino Film Festival. 
2. For the short film, "Jikken:" Best Documentary in Cityvisions. 
3. For the short film "Anonymous Assassin:" Selected to be shown at the Asian American 
Film Screenings. 
4. A Silver Award at the 2000 Korean Advertising Awards for a commercial production for 
Samsung Electronics. 
The petitioner submitted a document labeled "screenings," which apparently lists the history for 
"Cuando la Luna esta Llena." The document indicates that the film won Best Screenplay, Best 
Cinematography and Best Fiction Film at the 2005 Cityvisions Film Festival, was screened at the 
Rhode Island International Film Festival, at the Independent Feature Project (IFP) as one of five 
films nominated for Best Short Film Award, at the Palm Springs International Film Festival, at 
The City College of New York7s (CCNY) Second Annual Cinema Cum Laude, at the Cinequest 
Film Festival, and at the Garden State Film Festival, and was selected as a finalist at the 
Rochester International Film Festival. The source of this document is not indicated and the 
document does not reflect who gathered the information or where and when it was compiled. 
The petitioner also submitted a webpage from Asian American Film Screenings announcing that 
the short film "Jikken would be screened as part of Cityvisions." The document, showing that the 
article was posted on June 1, 2005, indicates that the film was written, directed and edited by 
Doug Ing in fulfillment of his Master of Fine Arts degree requirements. The petitioner is listed as 
the producer. 
The petitioner submitted letters from faculty members in the Department of Media & 
Communication Arts at CCNY. They describe the Cityvisions Film Festival as a festival 
"showcasing graduate student thesis work," and stated that the petitioner's films "Cuando la 
Luna esta Llena" and "Jikken," on which he served as producer, were winners of best fiction and 
best documentary at the festival in 2005. Others who submitted letters on the petitioner's behalf 
also testify that he won awards for these films. The petitioner submitted no other competent 
Page 4 
documentary evidence to corroborate the receipt of any awards for these films. Going on record 
without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of 
proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing 
Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). Further, the 
petitioner submitted no evidence to establish that any recognition at the Cityvisions Film Festival 
or the Palm Springs International Festival of Short Films is nationally or internationally 
recognized as awards of excellence in filmmaking. 
In response to the director's request for evidence (RFE) dated December 28,2006, the petitioner 
submitted documentation of additional screenings of the films, Cuando la Luna esta Llena and 
Jikken, at the Poppy Jasper Film Festival and the 29th NY Asian American International Film 
Festival, respectively. The petitioner also submitted documentation that his short film "Seize the 
Day" placed in the top 15 at the 3rd Annual 72Hr Film Shootout. The petitioner submitted no 
documentation to establish that placing among the top 15 in a contest is evidence of winning any 
award or prize. 
The petitioner submitted a partial copy of a program for the 28'" Asian American International 
Film Festival 2005, which shows an entry for his four-minute film "Anonymous Assassin," and a 
copy of what purports to be the results of the 2000 Korean Advertising Awards, listing the 
beneficiary as the "silver" winner in the TV category. The translation accompanying this 
document, however, does not comply with the provisions of 8 C.F.R. 6 103.2(b)(3), in that the 
translator is not identified, and there is no certification that the translation is complete and 
accurate or that the translator is competent to translate from Korean into English. Accordingly, 
the document is of no probative value in this proceeding. The petitioner submitted no evidence to 
establish that mere selection for screening at film festivals, however meritorious, is a prize or 
award or that it is nationally or internationally recognized as such in his field of endeavor. 
The petitioner's evidence does not establish that he meets this criterion. 
On appeal, counsel asserts that the petitioner's selection for "competitions" at the IFP Market 
competition, the Rochester International Film Festival, the Palm Springs Shortfest and the Asian 
American International Film Festival "should be considered as a 'one time achievement' in a 
major international competition." 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(h)(3) describes a "one-time achievement" for the purpose of 
this visa classification as "a major, internationally recognized award." The petitioner submits 
documentation showing that these festivals enjoy some prestige; however, he submitted no 
documentation to establish that a prize or award presented by these organizations is considered a 
major, internationally recognized award or that he has won any award presented at these 
66 
competitions." The petitioner submitted a document labeled "screenings" that indicated the 
short film "Cuando La Luna Easta Llena" was an award winner at the Palm Springs International 
Festival of Short Films. However, as previously discussed, there is no evidence as to the source 
of this information and the petitioner submitted no other documentation verifying his receipt of 
this award. 
Page 5 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the jeld for which 
classzjcation is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines orjelds. 
To demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion, the petitioner must show 
that the association requires outstanding achievement as an essential condition for admission to 
membership. Membership requirements based on employment or activity in a given field, 
minimum education or work experience, standardized test scores, grade point average, 
recommendations by colleagues or current members, or payment of dues do not satisfy this 
criterion as such requirements do not constitute outstanding achievements. The overall prestige 
of a given association is not determinative. The issue is membership requirements rather than the 
association's overall reputation. 
The petitioner submitted documentation that he is a member of the IFP, which, according to 
counsel, is "regarded as the most important independent and documentary filmmaking 
organization." Counsel further asserts that "[mlost of its members are award winning filmmakers 
with international acclaim." However, the petitioner submitted no documentation to establish 
that IFP requires outstanding achievements of their members. In fact, the petitioner submitted no 
documentation on membership in the organization. 
The evidence does not establish that the petitioner meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signzficantly high 
remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field. 
With the petition, the petitioner submitted a copy of a June 1,2006 "Certificate of Employment" 
signed by President of Kilimanjaro Production. ~r stated that the petitioner 
worked for the company as a "CM PlannerICreative Director" from February 1999 until March 
2000, and that he won the Silver Prize for Korean Ad Awards as director of a commercial 
production for Samsung Electronics. further stated that the petitioner "was paid an 
annual salary of approximately $45,000 which was three times more than average annual salary 
for other directors." 
In response to the director's RFE, the petitioner submitted what purports to be a "verification of 
employrnent/salary" from signed by as Chairman of the Board of Directors 
on June 1, 2006, and a copy of an "annual salary contract" between the petitioner and 
Kilimanjaro Production dated October 1, 1999, for the period of October 1, 1999 to September 
30, 2000. The petitioner also provided a copy of a purported contract between Kilimanjaro 
Production and - for the period from November 1, 1999 to October 3 1, 2000. The 
translations accompanying these documents do not meet the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 
3 103.2(b)(3), in that the translator is not identified and the translations are not accompanied by 
certifications that they are complete and accurate and that the translator is competent to translate 
from Korean into English. 
Further, as noted by the director, it is not clear that the petitioner's job as CM planner is the same 
as that of filmmaker, his claimed area of extraordinary ability. Further, the petitioner submitted 
documentation that compared his salary only to those at Kilimanjaro and not to all other 
filmmakers. The petitioner submitted no evidence that his work at Kilimanjaro or as a filmmaker 
was significantly high rather to all others in his field. 
The evidence does not establish that the petitioner meets this criterion. 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly 
demonstrate that the alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of 
the small percentage who has risen to the very top of his field of endeavor. The petitioner 
submitted letters of recommendation from several individuals who laud his accomplishments and 
skill. 
However, review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself as 
a filmmaker to such an extent that he may be said to have achieved sustained national or 
international acclaim or to be within the small percentage at the very top of his field. The 
evidence indicates that films the petitioner produced as a student have excelled. The petitioner 
submitted no evidence of continued and sustained success following his student productions such 
as to establish that he has risen to the very top of his field of endeavor. The evidence is not 
persuasive that the petitioner's achievements set her significantly above almost all others in his 
field. Therefore, the petitioner has not established eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of 
the Act and the petition may not be approved. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 
of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the 
appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.