dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

ide;ltifyir,g data deleted to 
prevent cizzrly utrwmanted 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Of$ce of Ahinistrnlive Appenls MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
invasion of personal privacy 
 U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
LIN 07 098 50561 
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 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
PRO SE 
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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 
 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
{dk~c* Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office 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 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in the 
arts. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international 
acclaim requisite for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that she meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(1) 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 subparagaph 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 applicable regulation defines the statutory term "extraordinary ability" as "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. 8 204.5(h)(2). Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained 
national or international acclaim" that the statute requires. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). An alien can establish 
sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a "one-time achievement (that is, a major, 
international recognized award)." Id. Absent such an award, an alien can establish the necessary sustained 
acclaim by meeting at least three of ten other regulatory criteria. Id. However, the weight given to evidence 
submitted to fulfill the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(4), must depend on the 
extent to which such evidence demonstrates, reflects, or is consistent with sustained national or international 
acclaim at the very top of the alien's field of endeavor. A lower evidentiary standard would not be consistent 
with the regulatory definition of "extraordinary ability" as "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. 
5 204.5(h)(2). 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that she should have received additional time to respond to the director's 
Request for Evidence ("WE") because of delivery problems of a package sent from her home country of 
Georgia. The director granted the petitioner the maximum response time allowed by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
9 103.2(b)(8)(iv), which does not permit any extension. Even if the director had committed a procedural error 
by failing to provide the petitioner additional time in which to respond to the February 8, 2008 RFE, it is not 
clear what remedy would be appropriate beyond the appeal process itself. The petitioner has in fact 
supplemented the record on appeal as of June 25, 2008, and therefore it would serve no useful purpose to 
remand the case simply to afford the petitioner the opportunity to supplement the record with new evidence. 
In this case, the petitioner seeks classification as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts as a musician. 
The petitioner presented evidence that she is a professional ballerina and submitted evidence about the 
qualifications she received, however, she only claims eligibility on her original petition as "singer, composer, 
pianist." In support of the petition filed on February 12, 2007, the petitioner submitted news articles, letters of 
recommendation, membership verification and evidence about the associations, information about the 
Philharmonia, compositions that she authored, education records, recordings, and evidence of her awards. In 
response to the RFE dated February 8, 2008, the petitioner submitted a contract, two additional letters of 
recommendation, and promotional materials. On appeal, the petitioner submitted award certificates, information 
about the Georgian State Philharmonic, news articles, and letters of recommendation. The petitioner does not 
claim eligibility under any criteria not discussed below. 
(9 Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or awards 
for excellence in theJield of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that she received a certificate of "participation and success" in the Tsiteli 
Vardi (Red Rose) contest; first place in "We are looking for Talents" sponsored by the Khashuri Municipal 
Government Department for Education, Culture, Sport and Youth Issues; and first place in the 2002 Golden 
Voices contest. The petitioner also submitted a certificate of participation for a concert held at the Khashuri 
Culture Palace, a certificate for "active participation and success" in the State Philharmonic of Georgia Amateur 
Art Activities Festival, and a certificate for composing a hymn for the 2003 International Student Games. 
Although documentation of these various awards appears in the record, information about the significance of 
and national or international recognition of the contests is notably absent. For example, the petitioner did not 
submit evidence of the number of participants in the event or the standing or recognition of the other 
participants. Several of the petitioner's awards are from competitions that are not nationally recognized or 
consistent with those events that bestow national or international acclaim as they are regional in scope, having 
"Municipal" in the name of the event. In addition, the petitioner did not submit secondary evidence, such as 
news articles or letters from sponsoring organizations, documenting the prestige associated with her awards that 
would indicate their national or international recognition as awards for excellence in her field. On appeal, the 
petitioner states that the Golden Voices competition is an international festival, that "We are looking for talents" 
is an "American Idol" type competition, and that the International Student Games certificate and Georgian 
Voices award were for national level competitions. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence 
is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of SofJici, 22 1. & N. 
Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & N. Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 
1972)). 
The petitioner also submitted evidence of her first place award for participating as part of the ensemb~k = 
"in regional Delphic" contest sponsored by the media company Spectr. According to the letter submitted from 
- the ensemble '" is a dance troupe. We note that this award with '" appears to be 
an award for her dancing instead of her music, which thus falls outside of her area of claimed expertise. 
Page 4 
Accordingly, the petitioner did not establish eligibility under this criterion. 
(ii) Documentation of the alien S membership in associations in the field for which classijication is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international 
experts in their disciplines or fields. 
In order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion, a petitioner must show that the 
association requires outstanding achievement as an essential condition for admission to membership. 
Membership requirements based on, for example, employment or activity in a given field, minimum 
education or experience, proficiency certifications, standardized test scores, grade point average, 
recommendations by colleagues or current members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion as such 
requirements do not constitute outstanding achievements. Further, the overall prestige of a given association 
is not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements rather than the association's overall 
reputation. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of her membership in The Culture Promotion Association "Ganmanatlebeli" 
(the "Association"). The letter from Association members indicates that the petitioner was recommended for 
membership by "the Chairman of Composer's Association, Director of Georgian State 
Philharmonic Socie Merab Donadze and the leader of the ensemble 'Rustavi' Anzor Erkomaishvili." The 
letter from &, Director of Culture Promotion for the Association, states that the Association was 
founded by three famous Georgian performers. Although the letter submitted indicates that the petitioner was 
- - - 
recommended by respected artistic figures in Georgia, it does not state how membership in this organization is 
actually chosen and nothing in that letter or the other information submitted about the Association indicates that 
membership is predicated upon outstanding achievement in the field. In addition, this information does not 
indicate who decides on membership so that we are unable to conclude that membership applications are judged 
by nationally or internationally recognized experts in the field. On appeal, the petitioner states that the 
recommendation from "was decisive factor [sic] that allowed [her] to be awarded the 
membership." Again, going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes 
of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of SofJici, 22 I. & N. Dec. at 165. 
Accordingly, the petitioner does not establish eligibility under this criterion. 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, 
relating to the alien's work in thejield for which classiJication is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
In general, in order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be primarily about the petitioner and, as 
stated in the regulation, be printed in professional or major trade publications or other major media. To qualify 
as major media, the publication should have significant national or international distribution. An alien would 
not earn acclaim at the national level from a local publication. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, 
nominally serve a particular locality but would qualify as major media because of significant national 
distribution, unlike small local community papers.' 
1 
 Even with nationally-circulated newspapers, consideration must be given to the placement of the article. 
For example, an article that appears in the Washington Post, but in a section that is distributed only in Fairfax 
County, Virginia, for instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 5 
The petitioner submitted an article about her that appeared in the Khashuri Messenger, an article about her that 
appeared in the January 12, 2007 Courier, and "My Life - is Music" which appeared in a 2006 Shalom 
Aleykhem. Although these articles are all primarily about the petitioner, she did not submit evidence that the 
publications amount to professional or major trade publications or other major media such as through circulation 
statistics, distribution levels, or rankings. On the top of the translation of the first article, a notation appears that 
the Khashuri Messenger began publication in 1931 and has a circulation of 2,000. Not only was no objective 
evidence provided to support this notation made by an unknown source, no information was provided to show 
how that circulation number compares to other publications operating in Georgia or the region so that we are 
unable to conclude that this number evidences a high circulation indicative of major media. No information was 
provided about the other publications outside of the petitioner's representations that their "circulation area 
encompasses completely Northeast region of the United States." Going on record without supporting 
documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. 
Matter of Sofici, 22 I. & N. Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & 
N. Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
Accordingly, the petitioner does not establish eligibility under this criterion. 
(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 alliedfield of specification for which classijlcation is sought. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3) provides that "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." Evidence of the petitioner's participation as a 
judge must be evaluated in terms of these requirements. The weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv), therefore, depends on the extent to which such evidence demonstrates, 
reflects, or is consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the alien's field of 
endeavor. A lower evidentiary standard would not be consistent with the regulatory definition of 
"extraordinary ability" as "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. 5 204.5(h)(2). For example, judging a 
national competition for top artists is of far greater probative value than judging a regional, youth, or student 
competition. 
The letters submitted by the Directors of 
routinely serves on a jury for the Associatio 
the petitioner produced, organized, and served on the jury of the 2002-2005 "Zone and General Caucasus 
Olympiads of talented children." No further information about the competitions judged by the petitioner 
appears in the record. From this scant description of the petitioner's judging, we are unable to determine what 
kind of competition was judged by the petitioner so we are unable to determine that she judged a competition in 
her field. In addition, the information indicates that the competition was a youth competition and not a 
competition among professionals or a competition that is otherwise consistent with or conveys national or 
international acclaim. 
For all of the above reasons, the petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. 
Page 6 
(v) Evidence of the alien S original scientiJc, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of 
major sign~jicance in the$eld. 
The petitioner submitted letters of recommendation purportedly supportive of her claim of eligibility under this 
criterion. While letters such as these provide relevant information about an alien's experience and 
accomplishments, they cannot by themselves establish the alien's eligibility under this criterion because they do 
not demonstrate that the alien's work is of major significance in her field beyond the limited number of 
individuals with whom she has worked directly. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by 
an alien in support of an immigration petition carry less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of major 
contributions that one would expect of an alien who has achieved sustained national or international acclaim. 
The letter from 
 director of Art School "Melodia" of Khashuri, states that the petitioner was a 
talented student and "she always made [the school] proud" in her performances and as a competitor. The letter 
from , producer for Art Emes Entertainment, states that the petitioner "is a very talented pianist 
who has performed in many concerts." The letter from Nana Ivaneishvili states that the petitioner "is 
remarkable dancer, player and singer which wonderfully express her energetic and original personality." She 
felt that the petitioner's compositions were "enchantring in] the depth and earnestness of them." The letter from 
-- - 
states that the petitioner "is a great talent." The letter from 
 states that 
the petitioner has "always appeared successfully" at concerts and contests and that she "is the author of some 
musical works and some songs." 
 The letter from 
 states that the petitioner served as 
concertmaster and was "diligen[t], ab[le to] improvis[e] and professional." The letter from 
 states 
that the petitioner "has individual and original performance manner. She is also the author of many songs and 
composition." The letter from states that the petitioner "is educated, purposeful and sociable 
young woman" and that she successfully completed her musical education and received many awards. The 
letter fiom states that the petitioner "was always distinguished by her musical and 
choreographic talent." The letter from - states that the petitioner "is talented musician 
performer [who] . . . distinguishes by her individuality, delicacy manner of performance and high 
professionalism." The letter from states that the petitioner is "a talented pianist . . . [who] has 
ori inal manner of performance, keen hearing and she is characterized as professional pianist." The letter from 
-I states that the petitioner "is an excellent musician, she is distinguished by her professionalism 
and diligence." The letter fiom states that the petitioner distinguished herself in school "by her 
talent and virtuosic performance." The letter from - states that he is "inspired by [the 
petitioner's] style and penetration to the music. Georgian spirit and aspiration is deep in her soul. She is very 
diligent and smart person, she wonderfully plays piano." The letter from states that she is also 
"most impressed with [the petitioner's] talent and excellent creative work." In this case, the letters of 
recommendation submitted by the petitioner are not sufficient to meet this criterion. Although these letters are 
complimentary of the petitioner's abilities, they do not state nor demonstrate that she has made original 
contributions of major significance to the field. 
The petitioner also submitted some examples of music she composed. 
 While those providing letters of 
recommendation recognize that the petitioner composes, there is no evidence that her work has had major 
significance in the field at large. For example, the record does not indicate the extent of the petitioner's 
influence on other artists nationally or internationally, that her pieces have been performed, nor does it show that 
the field has somehow changed as a result of her work. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in thejield at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
Frequent performances are intrinsic to the music profession. Duties or activities which nominally fall within a 
given criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) do not demonstrate national or international acclaim if they are inherent 
to the occupation itself. In the performing arts, national or international acclaim is generally not established by 
the mere act of appearing in public, but rather by attracting a substantial national or international audience, or 
through other indicia of sustained national or international acclaim. The petitioner submitted evidence of her 
participation in, and awards from, municipal, regional, student and amateur competitions, as discussed above 
under the first criterion. The petitioner also submitted evidence of her performances at the Tbilisi City Temple 
of Saint Trinity as part of a charitable concert and with the Georgian State Philharmonic. The petitioner failed 
to show that she was either the main attraction at her performances or that her participation was otherwise 
indicative of sustained national or international acclaim. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments 
that have a distinguished reputation. 
In order to meet this criterion, a petitioner must establish the nature of the alien's role within the entire 
organization or establishment and the reputation of the organization or establishment. The petitioner submitted 
evidence regarding the Georgian State Philharmonia, which as the director noted, establishes that it is an 
organization with a distinguished reputation. The letter from states that the petitioner's "stage 
activity with the team is always successful and the spectators like it very much. She belongs to those 
collaborators of Georgian State Philharmonia, who are in the high-paid category." Another letter from Mr. 
states that the petitioner is a soloist with the Philharmonia and participated on a tour with the group 
throughout the Caucasus. No other information appears in the record concerning the number of other soloists, 
the concerts actually performed by the petitioner with the Philharmonia, or other information distinguishing her 
role from that of other performers or artistic management to indicate that her role was leading or critical for the 
Philharmonia. We note that the letter from indicates that he was the featured performer and 
soloist for at least some of these performances while the petitioner acted as his "concertmaster," but the record 
contains no other evidence of the petitioner's work as a concertmaster. also does not indicate 
that the role of concertmaster was a usual one for the petitioner as opposed to a special event when he 
performed. 
The letter from producer for Art Emes, states that the petitioner "has performed in many 
concerts" produced by the company. The information submitted about Art Emes shows that the company puts 
on cultural and ethnic events and celebrations, but this evidence does not establish that Art Emes enjoys a 
distinguished reputation. In addition, the petitioner's role as performer was not established to be a leading or 
critical one for the organization as the petitioner submitted no evidence as to which or how many shows she 
participated in or how her participation advanced the goals of the organization in such a way to make her role 
leading or critical. 
The letter from 
 states that the petitioner worked as a piano teacher for the Art School of 
Khashuri "Melodia" and that the petitioner "was held in high respect and had a good authority as over the 
pupils, so over the parents and pedagogues collective"-and that the 
 studenis performed 
"brilliantTlv1." No evidence was submitted about the Art School so we are unable to conclude that it eniovs a 
La> " - 
distinguished reputation. The letter from 
 is insufficient to show that the petitioner's role as a 
piano teacher was leading or critical for the Art School as no information appears to show how her role was any 
different than other teachers or administrators with the school. 
The letter from 
 and 
 details the petitioner's work as a soloist for the group 
m7 however, this is a dance group instead of a music group and the petitioner submitted no evidence to 
show that involvement with this troupe evidences national or international acclaim as a musician. Even if the 
petitioner had shown that her work with falls within her field, she submitted no information about the 
troupe to show that it enjoys a distinguished reputation, the evidence of the one award being insufficient. Also, 
the evidence submitted does not indicate how many soloists perform with the troupe or that the petitioner's role 
was leading or critical as compared to other dancers with the troupe. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. 
In addition to the criteria discussed above, the statute and regulations require that the petitioner seek to continue 
work in her area of expertise in the United States. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1 1 53(b)(l)(A)(ii); 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(5). Such evidence may include letter(s) from prospective employer(s), 
evidence of prearranged commitments such as contracts, or a statement from the petitioner detailing plans on 
how he intends to continue his work in the United States. In response to the RFE, the petitioner submitted a 
contract entered into between her and Art Emes Entertainment for unspecified services to begin on January 20, 
2008 at a charge of $1,500. Information was submitted about events produced by Art Emes from 2001-2007, 
however, the contract did not specifL the nature of the petitioner's duties under its terms. A letter was also 
submitted from - Art Emes President, who states that the contract lasts for one year and its 
intent is to "guarantee concerts, further cooperation, producing, advertising, sponsoring and introducing 
Americans with the creation of [the petitioner]." As this contract is not specific as to what the petitioner is 
expected to do, we are unable to conclude that the petitioner seeks to continue working in her area of expertise. 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), 
only if the alien can establish extraordinary ability through extensive documentation of sustained national or 
international acclaim demonstrating that the alien has risen to the very top of his or her field. The record in this 
case does not establish that the petitioner achieved sustained national or international acclaim as a musician 
placing her at the very top of her field. She is thus ineligible for classification as an alien with extraordinary 
ability pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A). 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. 5 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
This decision is rendered without prejudice to the filing of a new petition under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Act with the requisite supporting evidence. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.