dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Department of fiomeland Security 
20 Mass Ave , N W , Rm ,43042 
Wash~ngton, DC 20529 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: JAN 0 8 
SRC 0 7 098 5 1925 
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: 
SELF KEPRESENTED 
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. 9 103.5 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 $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
/$&-hn Grissom, Acting Director 
/ 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCIJSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 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 to classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
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 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 into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained national or international 
acclaim" that the statute requires. 
 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(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. fj 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. fj 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). 
This petition, filed on February 5,2007, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as a 
singer, choirmaster, and producer. The petitioner submitted supporting evidence both initially and in response 
to a Request for Evidence dated April 16, 2007 including a diploma in choral conducting, numerous 
recognitions and awards for his participation in various concerts and competitions, six letters verifying past 
employment, one news article, three letters about his involvement in the Georgian community in the United 
States, and twelve letters of recommendation. Most of the evidence relates to the petitioner's involvement with 
the Ensemble Kutaisi. We address the evidence submitted in the following discussion of the regulatory criteria 
relevant to the petitioner's case. The petitioner does not claim eligibility under any criteria not addressed below. 
Page 3 
(i) Documentation of the alien S receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or awards 
for excellence in thejeld of endeavor. 
In his brief on appeal, the petitioner states that he meets this criterion because he received various awards at 
national and international festivals. Awards and certificates of participation appearing in the record include: an 
undated certificate for participation in 3 royal concert awarded by the Board of Kobuleti; a 1985 certificate for 
participation in an event hosted by the P. Makharadze Railway Club; award for "winning the Festival" signed by 
the Chairman of Imereti Regional Sport Dance Federation; a 2003 award of "the Title of laureate and the prize 
of' for high professiona [sic] performance;" a 2005 award of "the Diploma of the I degree 
and the Title of Laureate" by the Workers' Union of Georgia; a 2002 award "for developing folk by the 
Supporting Fund of Youth Generation; an undated award of laureate in the Georgian Folk Dance Second 
Republican Festival; an undated award of "the Title of Laureate, Golden Eagle, Golden Medal and 10000 1,ari" 
in the Folklore Musical Children and Young TV Festival; a 2005 diploma signed by the President of the 
International Association "SIOPI" of Georgian Folklore and Traditional Art Festival, the President of Georgian 
Railway-men Cultural Center Union, and the Chairman of Abkhazian Choreographic Art Workers; a 2006 
certificate for participation in the "Folklore Supporting National Program;" a 2004 award of "the Title of 
Laureate" from the Young Performers Republican Festival of Folklore and Stage Art; a 2006 certificate of 
participation by the Georgian National Committee "STOP;" a 2005 award for "best Chormaster [sic]" by the 
Local Government of Kutaisi, Department of Culture, Sport and Tourism; a 1999 award for "first place 
choirmaster" from the Folk Song and Dances Festival held in Spain; an undated certificate for participation in 
"Ct. Paris House of UNESCO;" eight undated certificates signed by the director of Kutaisi Ensemble for 
"sucsesfull turne" (errors in originals) in Bulgaria, Italy, Spain, France, Germany, Ukraine, Turkey, and "Island 
Martenik;" an undated certificate awarding "The best of best Chormaster" for the Georgian first National Song 
and Dance Festival; an undated recognition for the Kutaisi Ensemble for its 25 year anniversary; a 1997 
certificate awarding the grand prize to Kutaisi Ensemble in the Georgian National Choreographic First Festival; 
and a 2004 certificate for the Kutaisi Ensemble's participation in an unnamed festival signed by members of the 
Ozurgeti Development Fund and the Georgian Folk Song International Center. 
Although documentation of these various awards appears in the record, information about the significance of 
and national or international recognition of the festivals is notably absent. For example, the "Diploma" awarded 
by "The Judges of Festival and Competition of Georgian Song and Dance Choreographic Ensembles," contains 
no information about this Festival, including how this Festival was nationally or internationally recognized in 
the field of Georgian music or in the general area of folk music. 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 or limited as to 
eligibility, such as by age of participant. In addition, the petitioner did not submit secondary evidence, such as 
news articles or letters from sponsoring organizations, documenting the prestige associated with his awards that 
would indicate their national or international recognition as awards for excellence in his field. We also note that 
many of the "awards" evidence participation instead of recognition or acclaim within the competition. In 
addition, many of these "awards" were signed by the Director of the Kutaisi Ensemble instead of by an official 
of the purported awarding organization. 
As noted by the director, some of the certificates seem to correspond to photographs of trophies and plates, 
however, the petitioner failed to provide any explanation as to how the documents correspond to the 
Page 4 
photographs and he provided no translation of the writing on those trophies and plates. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3) 
requires that "[alny document containing foreign language submitted to USCIS shall be accompanied by a 
full English language translation which the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the 
translator's certification that he or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English." On 
appeal, the petitioner claims that he did submit translations for these trophies and plates because he submitted 
"corresponding dipomas [sic] . . . in order with [the] pictures." These diplomas, however, were not issued by 
the organization that awarded the trophies or plates, but instead were signed by the Director of the Kutaisi 
Ensemble and the diplomas do not contain identifying information such as the competition's name or the award 
won. Without sufficient identifjling information, the diplomas do not provide sufficient information concerning 
the trophies and plates to document any prizes awarded. Also, the petitioner submitted five photographs that 
were out of focus and cropped so that the entire trophy is not visible; the only two trophies identifiable in this 
group seem to be from a competition held in Idaho, however, the petitioner provided no substantive information 
about these trophies to demonstrate their national or international recognition. In his appellate brief, the 
petitioner states that he demonstrated eligibility under this criterion through the numerous diplomas and awards, 
but he still fails to assert or show that all of the events were competitions and that those events that were 
competitions award nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his field, as 
required by 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3)(i). Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(ii) Documentation of the alien S membership in associations in the field for which classrfication is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or interfiational 
experts in their di.w:iplines or fields. 
The petitioner submitted a copy of his admission into the Creative Personalities Choreography Union of Georgia 
and an extract from the bylaws of that organization. That extract indicates that a requirement for membership is 
being "choreographers, who greatly contribute to the prosperity of Georgian dances" or those who "greatly 
contribute" to the development of Georgian dance and that prospective members must have won "festivals, 
Grand-prize, [sic] laureate awards, prizes, medals and diplomas." We note that the petitioner does not claim to 
be a choreographer and did not otherwise show how he contributed to the development of Georgian dance. In 
addition, the petitioner failed to introduce any evidence that the Union's membership applications are judged by 
national or international experts in the field. Although it seems as if the petitioner judged dance groups, see 
section iii below, he did not provide evidence of any sort of dance submission or any other sort of choreographic 
work to which he contributed or for which he was recognized. Without further evidence concerning the Union 
and the petitioner's membership qualifications, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other mujor media, 
relating to the alien's work in the field for which classrfication is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The petitioner submitted only one published article: an October 2006 article appearing in "The Resume." The 
record contains no evidence of the usual circulation of this publication or any other evidence that the source of 
this article is a professional, major trade, or other major media publication. In his appellate brief, the petitioner 
states that "the Independent Weekly Newspaper 'THE RESUME' is widely distributed. . . . the scale of the 
United States and Georgia is absolutely different. 8-10 thousand copies distributed weekly is [sic] very high 
volume for Georgia." However, no evidence appears in the record that "The Resume" boasts a distribution level 
of 8,000-10,000 weekly copies. Simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. See Matter of Soffici, 22 I. & N. 
Page 5 
Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & N. Dec. 190 (Reg. 
Comm. 1972)) and Matter of Ho, 22 I. & N. Dec. 206,211 (Comm. 1998). Accordingly, the petitioner does not 
meet 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 speciJication for which classijication is sought. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that he served as a member of and twice headed the examination board for a 
cultural-educational school that provides choreographer and conductor training and that he served as a member 
of and once headed the jury of a city contest for performance arts. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 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 
Ilational 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 snlall percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor." 8 C.F.R. fj 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 record in this case does not 
include supporting evidence establishing the level of acclaim associated with the petitioner's involvement in 
these competitions or with others involved as judges or participants. In fact, the only information about either 
competition included was the year of participation and the sponsoring organization's name. The documents 
show that the petitioner judged prospective students for a cultural educational school and contestants in a 
municipal contest. The evidence does not demonstrate that the petitioner judged artists already working in his 
or an allied field in a manner consistent with national or international acclaim. Consequently we cannot 
conclude that he meets this criterion. 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scient$c, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of 
major significance in the field. 
We acknowledge the petitioner's submission of many reference letters praising his talent as an artist. Certain 
letters submitted contain very little, if any, information about the petitioner's original contributions to the 
Georgian folk music area of major significance. These letters include: a letter from a School Director; a letter 
from Chief of the Georgian Department of Culture, Sport and Tourism; a letter from 
the Director of Folklore Palace and Chief of the Trade Union; a letter from-of the 
Albanian Orthodox Church in Philadelphia; and a letter from -, director of the Philadelphia 
restaurant Pirosmani. 
In this case, the remaining letters of recommendation submitted by the petitioner are not sufficient to meet this 
criterion. These letters, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a successful extraordinary 
ability claim. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion statements submitted as expert testimony. 
See Matter of Caron International, 19 I. & N. Dec. 791, 795 (Comm. 1988). However, USCIS is ultimately 
responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. Id. The 
submission of letters of support from the petitioner's personal contacts is not presumptive evidence of 
eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See 
Page 6 
id. at 795. Thus, the content of the writers' statements and how they became aware of the petitioner's reputation 
are important considerations. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by an alien in support 
of an immigration petition are of less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of original contributions of 
major significance that one would expect of an artist who has sustained national or international acclaim at the 
very top of the field. 
Several letters submitted contain information about the petitioner's past activities, but do not specify how those 
activities greatly impacted the petitioner's field. A letter from the Art Manager and Director of the Ensemble 
"Kutaisi" wrote: "[The petitioner] was one of the best singers who could also play different national 
instruments. For many years he used to travel to various countries of the world together with the ensemble and 
was awarded different international prizes." Another letter, from the Art Manager and Director of the Young 
Theater of Kutaisi wrote that the petitioner "is distinguished as the best singer and can play different 
instruments, he is also gifted for acting and has organizational abilities." A letter from the director and art 
manager of the Kutaisi state theater states that the petitioner "has arranged . . . arrangements [to popularize 
"famous and honoured people" or "spheres of art"] in Kutaisi's theater many times, which were characterized 
with high professionalism and high commercial success." A letter written by the Manager of the Central Branch 
of "Procredit Bank" wrote that "the Ensemble 'Ibereti' . . . [is] popular not only within the country but abroad 
as well. [The Ensemble has] participated many times in the festivals organized in West Europe, where due to 
their professionalisnl they achieved great success . . . [as] the result of the Ensemble's producer's, [the 
petitioner's] great work." The Conductor of the Ensemble "Sioni" and the Conductor of the Ensemble 
"Kolkha" wrote letters praising the petitioner's composition and stating that a performance of the petitioner's 
songs helped the Ensembles succeed in concert. According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(v), an 
alien's contributions must be not only original but of major significance. We must presume that the phrase 
"major significance" is not superfluous and, thus, that it has some meaning. While the petitioner's music has 
earned thc admiration of those providing letters of recommendation, there is no evidence that his 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, nor does it show that the field has somehow changed as a 
result of his work. 
The ~etitioner also submitted three letters from "inde~endent ex~erts." however. none of these letters discussed 
. , 
the impact of the petitioner's work on the field of Georgian folk music. The letter from- 
states that the petitioner prepares "principally different and beautiful style of arrangement of Georgian folklore 
- A - 
and city songs;' (errors in original), and that he is a "real professional!' A second letter written by - 
a soloist of the Ensemble "Iberti," merely states that the petitioner has "gained the attention of our 
society" by his "initiat[ion] of many theater arrangements, show-concerts and char& auctions." A letter from 
an artist with the State Drama Theater of Georgia, states that the petitioner "is very talented 
musician and great creator." Talent in one's field, however, is not necessarily indicative of artistic contributions 
- 
of major significance. While the letters indicate that the petitioner is considered a successful producer and 
singer of Georgian folk songs, the record lacks evidence showing that he has made original contributions that 
have significantly influenced or impacted the field. 
Other relevant evidence fails to establish that the petitioner's work has made original, major contributions to his 
field. We acknowledge that the petitioner submitted a compact disc of the music of his Ensemble, a DVD, a 
poster of what appears to be the children's Kutaisi ensemble, and a magazine written in the Russian language 
(containing no translation). These items fail to establish that these recordings received wide critical acclaim, 
awards or other significant recognition by his field. The petitioner submitted a letter from an unnamed store 
manager who states that the Ensemble "enjoys wide popularity in Georgia" and that his store, located 
sells the Ensemble's album "in large circulation." A second letter from a store manager, 
, states that "the album of the Ensemble was sold in record numbers in the net of the 'Music 
Centre', namely 2200 units, retail price - 18 GEL" (errors in original). No further details were provided such as 
how that sales total compared to the sales of other recordings of Georgian folk music or whether this recording 
received wide critical acclaim, awards, or other significant recognition by others in his field. The petitioner did 
submit a letter from manager of a radio station, stating that a song by the Ensemble 
"took the first place in Top Hits" and "were awarded the title of the best Ensemble of the year." However. the 
petitioner did not submit any information about the radio station including its popularity or about the contest 
referenced in the manager's letter including who was eligible for the contest, who helped judge the contest (the 
letter indicates that the winner was chosen "by the listeners' request"), or whether the contest is held in high 
esteem. None of the submitted evidence indicates, for example, that the petitioner has a unique style, technique 
or other qualities that have significantly influenced other Georgian folk singers or composers, or that his work 
has otherwise made a notable impact in his field. Without extensive documentation showing that the 
petitioner's work has been unusually influential, highly acclaimed throughout his field, or has otherwise risen to 
the level of original contributions of major significance, we cannot conclude that he meets this criterion. 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high sczlary or other significantly high remuneration for services, 
ill re1rfio.r to others in the~fieW 
The record ~ontains a letter from the Director of the Kutaisi Ense~nble stating that the petitioner earned 200 
Georgian Lari (GEL,) per month as a singer when he was initially hired, then "after some years," he received a 
salary increase to 300 GEL per month, and then in 2006, the petitioner was promoted to choirmaster and 
received a salary of 500 GEL per month. In his brief on appeal, the petitioner states that "[tlhe average salary 
for singer in Georgia is around of 200 GEL" (errors in original), however, he submitted no documentation to 
support his statement. Simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for 
purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. See Matter of Sofjci, 22 I. & N. Dec. 158, 165 
(Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & N. Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)) and 
khtter of Ho, 22 I. & N. Dec. 206, 21 1 (Comm. 1998). As the petitioner provided no evidence to establish that, 
at the time of filing, the petitioner's salary was significantly higher than other Georgian folk singers or 
choirmasters or was comparable to such performers at the very top of their field, the petitioner does not meet 
this criterion. 
(x) Evidence of commercicxl successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofJice receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
In his appellate brief, the petitioner states that he "submitted two evidence that [his] CD's enjoys a great 
popularity in Georgia and accordingly it is sold in large circulation" (errors in original). As discussed above, the 
petitioner failed to submit evidence showing how the sales figures contained in the letters from the store 
managers compare to the number of sales of other folk musicians' albums. Accordingly, the petitioner does not 
meet this criterion. 
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 evidence in 
this case indicates that the petitioner is a singer and choirmaster who mainly worked with the Ensemble Kutaisi 
Page 8 
which has enjoyed some degree of success at folk music competitions. However, the record does not establish 
that the petitioner achieved sustained national or international acclaim as a member of the Ensemble or through 
his other work so as to place him at the very top of his field. He 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. 9 1153(b)(l)(A), and his 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. fj 1361. 
 The petitioner here has not sustained that burden. 
 Accordingly, the appeal will be 
dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.