dismissed EB-1A Case: Image Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 7163794 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : WL Y 29, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner , an image consultant who coaches beauty pageant contestants , seeks classification as an 
alien 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 record did not 
establish that the Petitioner had satisfied at least three of ten initial evidentiary criteria , as required . 
The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova review , we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to aliens 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 their 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 
they 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). 
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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner claims to be "an internationally recognized Image Consultant who has achieved success in 
her field through her coaching and tutelage of some of Latin America's most important beauty queens." 
The Petitioner is the director and principal instructor atl I, which she 
founded in Venezuela in 2003. 
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). The Petitioner claims to have met five criteria, summarized below: 
• (iii), Published material about the alien in professional or major media; 
• (iv), Participation as a judge of the work of others; 
• (vii), Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases; 
• (viii), Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments; and 
• (ix), High remuneration for services. 
The Director found that the Petitioner met two of the evidentiary criteria, numbered (iv) and (viii). On 
appeal, the Petitioner asserts that she also meets the other three claimed evidentiary criteria. 
After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we conclude that the Petitioner has met only the 
fourth criterion, pertaining to acting as a judge. Below, we discuss the other four claimed criteria. 
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 necessa,y 
translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) 
To satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner submits copies of newspaper articles, mostly discussing individual 
pageant contestants. The articles identify the Petitioner as the contestants' trainer, but this one mention 
does not make the articles published material about her. Other articles briefly quote the Petitioner about 
upcoming events. 
2 
The Petitioner claims that "the plain language of the criterion requires that the articles be about the 
beneficiary or the beneficiary's work." The language of the regulation requires "[p ]ublished material 
about the alien ... relating to the alien's work." The Petitioner's insertion of the conjunction "or" 
critically changes the meaning of the passage. 1 The published material must be "about the alien" and 
"relat[e] to the alien's work in the field." 
The Petitioner contends: 
Because [she] is an Image Consultant, her work is always conducted in unison with a 
contestant/individual. Therefore, when she is featured in major media discussing her work 
as an image consultant, there will also be references to the contestants with whom she 
worked in the context of her success. Thus, as required by this criterion, the 
aforementioned articles are about the beneficiary and her work in the field as an Image 
Consultant, coaching contestants at beauty pageants. 
The submitted articles are not about the Petitioner, with "references to the contestants." The contestants 
are the primary focus of the articles; a typical article refers to the Petitioner once, stating that she trained 
a particular contestant or will be traveling with her. The headlines to the articles refer to the contestants, 
either by name or by other descriptions. The record does not support the Petitioner's contention that these 
articles are "entirely about [the Petitioner] and her work as an Image Consultant." The Petitioner is not 
the subject of any of the articles submitted as evidence of published material about her. 
The Petitioner has not satisfied 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 claims to satisfy this criterion through her work with pageant contestants, and her work on 
fashion shows and television programs. 
The Petitioner states that "her clients' international beauty pageants" constitute display of her work at 
artistic showcases, because the Petitioner has significant influence over the appearance and presentation 
of each contestant. The Director found that the primary purpose behind the pageants was competitive 
rather than artistic. We acknowledge the Petitioner's observation that prizes exist in the arts, but the 
awarding of prizes and titles at beauty pageants is not incidental or ancillary to the events. Rather, 
competing for titles is the primary purpose of these pageants, many of which are named after the top title 
to be awarded there. 
Furthermore, local news coverage of the pageants focuses on the contestants themselves, mentioning the 
Petitioner's name in passing. The Petitioner may have put great effort into instructing and training these 
models, but ultimately it is the contestants themselves who are presented to the audience, and the 
contestants, not their trainer, win the pageant titles. 
1 The word "or" appears in the regulation only in a completely separate context, when distinguishing between "professional 
or major trade publications or other major media." 
3 
The Petitioner asserts that "beauty pageants ... evaluate [a] contestant's artistic abilities." The Petitioner, 
however, is not the contestant. She many nurture the talents of the contestants, but ultimately it is the 
contestants, not their teachers, who are evaluated first-hand, and to whatever extent a pageant may 
constitute a display, the work displayed is that of the contestants, not their mentors. By way of analogy, 
when a painting hangs in a museum, it is the painter's own work that is on display, not the work of the 
painter's teachers. A teacher can shape a student's talents, but those talents ultimately belong to the 
student. 
Furthermore, an organizational chart shows thatl !employs several teachers. This indicates that the 
Petitioner is not solely, personally responsible for training the pageant contestants. The Petitioner does 
not explain why it is her work, not that of the teachers ( or contestants), that is on display at a pageant. 
The Petitioner has also organized fashion shows. These events do not appear to be competitive, but the 
primary focus of attention appears to be the garments shown. The Petitioner does not claim to have 
designed the clothing that is displayed at these fashion shows. 
The Petitioner also contends that "her work on the television programs .__ ________ __, and 
I t also constitute artistic displays. The Petitioner, however, does not establish that the 
shows exist in order to <ljsniav her artistic work. The nmductian manager otl I. a regional 
television station based i~ I describes I jas "a reality show where a group 
of participants ... demonstrate why do they want to be models ... dancers ... [or] singers?, and why do 
they want the crown?" The record does not show the extent, if any, to which a reality show about aspiring 
models reflects the Petitioner's artistry. A television program is not inherently an artistic display or 
showcase of the work of the program's producer. 
.__ _________ -,....c;.;;is;_;n=o.;;_t;_;a;.;._;_;te=le.;;..;,vision program in its own right. Rather, it is a recurring segment 
on the children's program.__ ___ ~ A newspaper article indicates that the segments are filmed by 
I l"to be later edited and transmitted byl I" That article also states that the segment "is 
aimed at a child audience, to teach them the importance of having a positive image at all times, based on 
body hygiene, personal grooming, social behavior, table etiquette, colors and combinations, good posture, 
good manners, among others." This description indicates that the principal purpose of 'I I 
I I' is educational or instructional, rather than artistic. 
The Petitioner has not satisfied this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role/or organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii) 
We disagree with the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner has satisfied this criterion. The Petitioner 
claims that her roles with I I andl lsatisfy this criterion, but the record does not 
support these claims. 
The Petitioner's leading role as director ofl lis not in dispute. To establish! Is 
distinguished reputation, however, requires evidence to allow a meaningful comparison betwee~n""FI =='-----, 
4 
and other entities of its kind. A printout froml l's own website amounts to self-serving promotional 
material rather than evidence of the entity's reputation. 
The Petitioner submits copies of newspaper articles dated between 2005 and 2012, said to be "about the 
distinguished reputation of the organization." Some articles are about individual pageant contestants, 
while others are about events such as a pageant at a fair and a fashion show at a shopping center; the 
articles indicate that the various models and contestants trained atl l Some of the events were in­
house pageants, in which all the contestants were I I students. The articles show thatl ~ s 
contestants receive some degree of news coverage, and have won some of the pageants in which they 
competed, but this information lacks necessary context. The term "distinguished reputation" is inherently 
comparative, but the submitted articles do not provide any basis for c~mparisol between! I and 
other agencies. For example, they do not show that contestants trained b win more pageants, or 
that contestants froml I receive more news coverage than contestants who trained elsewhere. 
Because preparing contestants for beauty pageants is a fundamental purpose of the I I it 
is not inherently a mark of distinction that some o±1 I's students have participated in some of those 
pageants. Not all pageants are of equal importance; the Petitioner acknowledges that "2.5 million girls 
participate in 100,000 bea~ants each year." The Petitioner has not established the prestige of the 
particular events in whiclL__J has entered contestants. The presence of contestants from more than 
one country does not suffice in this regard. 
The Petitioner also claims that she performed in a leadin or critical role for b roducing 
~--------~' and producing and hosting Another official 
states that the station does not employ the Petitioner as the producer of.__ ______ _.rather, the 
Petitioner is an "independent ... Producer" who purchased the airtime for the program. This is consistent 
with social media posts in the record that identify I I as the show's sponsor. The Petitioner 
does not establish that her independent production of a television program amounts to a leading or critical 
role for the television station that broadcasts that program. The Petitioner does not show, for example, 
that the program significantly increased the channel's viewership. A screen capture of an advertisement 
for I I from that program's own YouTube channel, shows that the advertisement had 
been viewed 11 times since May 2018, nearly 10 months before the petition's May 2019 filing date. 
Another clip from the show indicated three views since February 2018. 
The Petitioner has also not established that has a distin uished reputation. Information in the 
record indicates that the channel broadcasts "in the ~----~ Region" of Venezuela. A printout 
from Corp Web.net indicates thatl l"has a series of strategic alliances that position it not only 
nationally but also internationally," but does not elaborate. A web printout from ProductionHub.com 
states that I I is Venezuela's largest production company and television station," but this 
information appears not in a news article, but in a promotional press release from the company that 
provided equipment to the station. (The phrase "press release" appears between the headline and main 
body of the text.) 
For the above reasons, the Petitioner has not shown that she has performed in a leading or critical role for 
organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
5 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high sala,y or other significantly high 
remuneration for services, in relation to others in the.field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix) 
The Petitioner submits a three-page list, showing her claimed monthly income between October 2003 and 
November 2018. This document is not contemporaneous documentation, and it does not identify the 
source(s) of the Petitioner's income or explain how she earned it. 
Income statements from an accountant attest to the Petitioner's annual income for the above years. The 
accountant lists several seemingly independent sources of income, but rather than break down the 
amounts from each source, the accountant simply states the total. For examre, the Petitioner earned her 
2009 income as "Manager and Sole Shareholder o~._ _______ ____._, Image Advisor, Organizer 
of Beauty events, beauty and modeling contests and as host of television events with several companies 
as per contracts and Independent Professional." 
Itemized lists of contracts and work agreements show fees paid for specific projects, but do not distinguish 
between fees paid tol land income directly earned by the Petitioner. Sample work agreements in 
the record name the Petitioner as the contracted party, but those documents also indicate that she is acting 
asl Is representative. Even a~ l's sole shareholder, she cannot claim the company's gross 
income as her personal salary or remuneration for services, as some of that money must go toward other 
expenses, such as salaries for the I I's other employees. 
The Petitioner states that she submits "articles discussing the salary for the highest paid Image 
Consultants/Pageant Coaches in the United States," but these articles are inadequate for several reasons: 
The Petitioner's work took place outside the United States; the figures cited in the reports are anecdotal, 
rather than the result of systematic surveys; and the Petitioner's income derives from several sources 
besides one-on-one coaching of pageant contestants. The Petitioner has not provided a sufficient basis 
for comparison to show that her earnings are high compared to others performing similar work in 
Venezuela. 
On appeal, the Petitioner focuses on the distinction between "salary" and "other remuneration," and does 
not address other significant deficiencies in the evidence, discussed above. 
The Petitioner has not met the requirements of this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, 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 determination that the 
Petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. 
The Petitioner asserts that she is "one of Venezuela's most important Image Consultants in the Beauty 
Pageant Industry," and has worked"[ a ]s an Image Consultant for top level beauty pageants." The record, 
however, lacks evidence to support these claims by allowing an objective comparison between the 
G 
Petitioner and other image consultants in Venezuela. Most of the evidence in the record concerns the 
.__ _______ ___. of Venezuela, particularly the city o~ lin the state o-0 consistent 
with a primarily local or regional reputation. The Petitioner has judged pageants outside of Venezuela, 
but the pageants named on a submitted list were all produced by the same person in the Dominican 
Republic, which does not indicate widespread recognition. 
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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7