dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8749303 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JUNE 9, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a singer, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. See Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § l 153(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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner 
satisfied only one 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). 
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 Petitioner is a singer who has performed with various ensembles and Latin musicians in her native 
country of Venezuela and in the United States. 
A. 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). In denying the petition, the Director found that the Petitioner met only 
one of the evidentiary criteria, judging under 8 C.F.d. § 2
1
4.5(h)(3)(iv). The record reflects that the 
Petitioner 
1
articipated as a member of the jury for th Festival Internacional Orquidea de Oro in 
I Accordingly, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner fulfilled the judging criterion. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that she meets two additional criteria, discussed below. 1 We have 
reviewed all the evidence in the record and conclude that it does not support a finding that the 
Petitioner satisfies the requirements of 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 asserts that she meets this criterion based on her receipt of a Mara de Oro2 award in 
~-~I In order to fulfill this criterion, the Petitioner must demonstrate that she received the prize or 
award, and that it is nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field of endeavor. 3 
Relevant considerations regarding whether the basis for granting the prize or award was excellence in 
1 We note that the Director determined that the Petitioner initially submitted evidence related to the published material 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) but did not satisfy this criterion. The Petitioner does not contest this issue on appeal 
and therefore we deem it to be waived. See, e.g., Matter of M-A-S-, 24 l&N Dec. 762, 767 n.2 (BIA 2009). 
2 This award is also referred to in the record as the "Golden Mara" award. 
3 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 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. 
2 
the field include, but are not limited to, the criteria used to grant the prize or award, the national or 
international significance of the prize or award in the field, and the number of awardees or prize 
recipients as well as any limitations on competitors. 4 The Petitioner submitted a copy of her award 
certificate reflecting that she received thec=]Mara de Oro award for 1 lof the 
Year." Here, however, the record lacks sufficient objective evidence regarding the Golden Mara 
award to establish that it is a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in 
music or the arts. 
The Petitioner submitted a document dated November 2016 that bears the logo of the Fundacion Mara 
de Oro de Venezuela e Internacional. The document indicates that the Mara de Oro is a "prestigious 
award" that "has as [its] mission to enhance the work of revealing personalities of radio, television, 
cinema, theater, dance, advertising, culture, politics and sports," and that "candidates are elected at the 
national level and from all over the world, without exception." The document also confirms that the 
Petitioner was awarded theOGolden Mara Award for '1 lofthe year," and provides 
the names of other "important personalities" and "prestigious journalistic institutions" who previously 
won the award. However, this document is not a letter and is not attributed to or signed by a 
responsible authority for that organization. As a result, we cannot determine the actual source of the 
information contained therein, which limits the probative value of this evidence. 
The Petitioner also submitted an undated letter addressed to her from ~----------~ Fundacion Mara de Oro de Venezuela e Internacional, that provides general information about the 
foundation and asserts that the Mara de Oro award is "the only award that has certification in the 
country." The letter also states the award is given inlmmce occecel based upon "the verdict ofthel I 
people, according to the results of surveys conducted in different media ... and the consensus of the 
Board of Directors of this Foundation." 
Upon review, we
1 
agree
1 
with the Director that while the Petitioner documented her receipt of the Mara 
de Oro award in the record does not establish that the award is a nationally or internationally 
recognized award for excellence in her field. While we acknowledge the Petitioner's assertion on 
appeal that "the location of the bestowment of the award does not lessen its importance or determine 
that it is a local or regional prize," it remains that she did not submit evidence of the national or 
international recognition of her Golden Mara award, such as national or widespread local coverage of her 
award in arts, entertainment, or general media, showing that Mara de Oro award winners receive a level 
of media coverage that is commensurate with a nationally or internationally recognized award in the 
entertainment industry. The record also does not contain pertinent background information about the 
award from its organizer or another reliable source, such as a complete list of all of the award 
categories, the various levels of awards given, the criteria used to grant awards, or even whether all of 
the awards are deemed national in scope. Therefore, while the Petitioner documented her receipt of 
the Mara de Oro award in c=J the supporting evidence is insufficient to document that this is a 
nationally or internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in her field. 
3 
III. CONCLUSION 
We find that although the Petitioner satisfies the judging criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), she 
does not meet the additional criterion on appeal relating to nationally or internationally recognized 
awards. While she argues and submits evidence for one additional criterion on appeal, relating to 
membership in associations, we need not reach this additional ground. As the Petitioner cannot fulfill 
the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), we reserve this issue.5 
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 section203(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 )(1 )(A) of the Act and 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
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. 
5 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). 
4