dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF C-D-M-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 26,2017 
MOTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a pop singer, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in the arts. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )( 1 )(A), 8 U .S.C. ~ 1153(b)( 1 )(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. We dismissed the subsequent appeaL 
concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that he received a major. internationally recognized 
award or satisfy at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria. 
The matter is now before us on a motion to reconsider. Upon review. we will deny the motion. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) must dismiss a motion that does not satisfy 
applicable requirements. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). A motion to reconsider must state the reasons for 
reconsideration and be supported by any pertinent decisions to establish that the decision was based 
on an incorrect application of law or USCIS policy. 8 C.F.R. ~ 103.5(a)(3). A motion ··is not a 
process by which a party may submit, in essence, the same brief presented on appeal and seek 
reconsideration by generally alleging error." Matter of 0-S-G-, 24 I&N Dec. 56. 58 (BIA 2006). 
The Petitioner submitted a brief in support of the motion before us. However. the substance of the 
brief is predominantly a verbatim copy of language in the brief submitted in support of the appeal. 
In addition to being, in essence, the same brief presented in support of the appeal. the brief does not 
reference a specific statute, USCIS policy, or any pertinent decision to establish that our prior 
decision was based on an incorrect application of a law or policy. 
The only regulation cited in the predominantly verbatim briefs is 8 C.F.R. ~ 204.5(h)(3), which 
recites initial evidence that a petitioner seeking classification as an individual of extraordinary ability 
in the arts must submit to USCIS for review. The context of this reference is the Petitioner's belief 
that he has satisfied at least three of those criteria. 
A petitioner does not necessarily establish eligibility for the requested benefit by submitting initial 
evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 201 0). Instead. upon receipt of 
Matter ofC-D-M-
initial evidence USCIS must "examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and 
credibility" to determine whether a petitioner has demonstrated eligibility for the requested benefit. 
!d. 
Therefore, the briefs' verbatim reference to the petitioner's initial evidence requirement neither 
expressly nor implicitly alleges that the appeal dismissal was based on an incorrect application of 
law or policy; it simply states that which a petitioner must submit to users for review and generally 
alleges, by implication, that we erred by determining the Petitioner did not establish eligibility. See 
8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). 
Accordingly, we must deny this motion to reconsider because it does not satisfy applicable 
requirements. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3)-(4); Matter of'O-S-G-, 24 I&N Dec. at 58. 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is denied. 
Cite as Matter ofC-D-M-, ID# 927777 (AAO Sept. 26, 2017) 
2