dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF S-A-X-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAY 15, 2019 
MOTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, ~ I seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in the arts. 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 Petitioner's Form I-140, Immigrant Petition 
Alien Worker. We subsequently dismissed the Petitioner's appeal. 1 
The matter is now before us on a motion to reopen. Upon review, we will deny the motion. 
I. LAW 
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 two options for satisfying this classification's initial evidence 
requirements. First, a petitioner can demonstrate 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 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 submits qualifying evidence under at least three criteria, we 
will then determine whether the totality of 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. 2 
1 See Matter of S-A-X-. TD# 1567873 (AAO Sept. 24, 2018). 
2 See Kazarian v. users, 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. users, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 
2011). This two-step analysis is consistent with our holding that the "truth is to be determined not by the quantity of 
evidence alone but by its quality," as well as the principle that we examine "each piece of evidence for relevance, probative 
value, and credibility. both individually and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the 
fact to be proven is probably true." Matter of ehawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 
Matter of S-A-X-
A motion to reopen is based on documentary evidence of new facts. The requirements of a motion to 
reopen are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). We may grant a motion that satisfies these requirements 
and demonstrates eligibility for the requested immigration benefit. 
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 
The Director denied the petition, finding that the Petitioner had not satisfied any of the initial 
evidentiary criteria, of which he must meet at least three. In dismissing the appeal, we determined that 
the Petitioner fulfilled only two criteria, judging under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and artistic display 
under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). 3 On motion, the Petitioner submits a new document relating to the 
awards criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
III. ANALYSIS 
In order to fulfill the awards criterion under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), the Petitioner 
must demonstrate his "receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for 
excellence in the field of endeavor. "4 In our decision, we determined that the Petitioner did not 
establish that his receipt of the "Best I lof Pakistan" at '.__ _____ ____." in 2006 and 2008 
fulfilled this criterion. Specifically, we found that the Petitioner's evidence did not show that the 
awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field consistent with the 
regulatory criterion. 
On motion, the Petitioner presents a letter from I I president of market~ng anl sales for 
I IN etwork, who provided background information and viewership data regardin Network 
and I I In addition, he stated that 'D instituted an award for excellence in music for 
which it awards to the best musician of Pakistan," and "[ t ]his is an award recognized for its national 
standing and the recipient is truly the best in the country for that year." However,! ldid 
not explain or support his letter showing how the network's award is "recognized for its national 
standing." Furthermore, the Petitioner did not demonstrate through independent, objective evidence 
thatc=]Network's awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.5 
For these reasons, the Petitioner did not establish that he satisfied the awards criterion. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the evidence on motion establishes that he has fulfilled at 
least three of the evidentiary criteria. In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to 
3 As the Petitioner had not established his extraordinary ability under section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act, we found that we 
did not have to determine whether he intended to continue to work in the United States in his area of expertise. See section 
203(b)(l)(A)(ii) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5). 
4 See also USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form 1-140 
Petitions; Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADI 1-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. 
5 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 6 (stating that relevant factors regarding whether the basis 
for granting the prizes or awards was excellence in the field include, but not limited to, the criteria used to grant the awards 
or prizes, the national or international significance of the awards or prizes in the field, and the number of awardees or prize 
recipients as well as any limitations on competitors). 
2 
Matter of S-A-X-
establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; 
Matter of Skirball Cultural Ctr., 25 I&N Dec. 799, 806 (AAO 2012). Here, that burden has not been 
met. 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is denied. 
Cite as Matter of S-A-X-, ID# 3071133 (AAO May 15, 2019) 
3