dismissed
EB-1A
dismissed EB-1A Case: Interior And Exterior Design
Decision Summary
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary for the classification. The petitioner did not submit evidence meeting at least three of the ten regulatory criteria, and the letters of support provided on appeal were insufficient to demonstrate eligibility.
Criteria Discussed
Receipt Of Lesser Nationally Or Internationally Recognized Prizes Or Awards Membership In Associations Which Require Outstanding Achievements Published Materials About The Alien Participation As A Judge Of The Work Of Others Original Contributions Of Major Significance Authorship Of Scholarly Articles Display Of Work At Artistic Exhibitions Or Showcases Leading Or Critical Role For Organizations High Salary Or Other High Remuneration Commercial Successes In The Performing Arts
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
identi@ing data deleted to prevent cl~ii.1~ mwarranted invasion of' personal privacy U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 Washington, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NO'j ,.& ." Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: EAC 05 129 5 1956 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 1 153(b)(l)(A) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: SELF-REPRESENTED 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. LJ Robert P. Wiemann, Chief Administrative Appeals Office Page 2 DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service Center, and 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. 5 I 153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. 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: (I) 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 have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. fj 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. 5 204.5(h)(3): Initial evidence: A petition for an alien of extraordinary ability must be accompanied by evidence that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise. Such evidence shall include evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized award), or at least three of the following: (i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor; (ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields; (iii) Published materials 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; (iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specification for which classification is sought; (v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field; (vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media; (vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases; (viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation; (ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field; or (x) Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. This petition, filed on March 30, 2005, seeks to classifL the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as an interior and exterior designer. In support of the petition, the petitioner submitted photographs of his work and a March 8, 2005 letter from a former employer describing his duties and responsibilities and listing his dates of employment. This evidence, however, was not sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's sustained national or international acclaim, or that his achievements have been recognized in his field of expertise. On October 3, 2005, the director issued a notice of intent to deny requesting that the petitioner submit evidence establishing his eligibility as an alien of extraordinary ability. The petitioner failed to respond to the director's notice of intent to deny. On March 9, 2006, the director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner had not established his eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. On appeal, the petitioner submits five letters of support from individuals within the state of New York who have employed his services. These letters of support, however, do not relate to the petitioner's eligibility under any of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3), nor are they adequate to demonstrate his sustained national or international acclaim. The petitioner states: Page 4 Through my hard work and dedication over the course of 30 years, I've proven myself professionally and financially as a responsible member of the business development community in my field. My work has yielded profit for my employers and community alike. I am financially stable and I feel that I have much more to contribute through my efforts. The petitioner does not challenge the director's findings, nor does he offer specific arguments addressing the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3). In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate his receipt of a major internationally recognized award, or that he meets at least three of the criteria that must be satisfied to establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself 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 is not persuasive that the petitioner's achievements set him significantly above almost all others in his field at the national or international level. 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. $ 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.