dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

~dentirylng data deleted to 
prevent dearty unwarranted 
invasion of pe~20nal psi~ag 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
b2, 
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. $ 11 53(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
' V Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont 
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 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. tj 1 153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary 
ability in the arts as a concert violinist and strings teacher. The director determined that the petitioner 
had not established the sustained national or international acclaim requisite to classification as an alien 
of extraordinary ability. 
In a letter dated September 26,2005, the petitioner states, "I would like to ask you to let me know if it 
is better to reconsider my case through EB-2 classification. I would like to request an oral argument to 
clarify this." The regulations do not permit consideration of an alien's eligibility under more than one 
employment-based immigrant classification on the basis of a single petition. A separate petition must 
be filed for each classification sought. See generally 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5. 
Accordingly, there is no need for oral argument in this case. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(CIS) has sole authority to grant or deny a request for oral argument and will grant argument only in 
cases involving unique factors or issues of law that cannot be adequately addressed in writing. See 8 
C.F.R. 5 103.3(b). In this instance, the petitioner has identified no unique factors or issues of law to 
be resolved in her case and the written record of proceedings fully represents the relevant facts and 
issues involved in the petitioner's case. Consequently, the request for oral argument is denied. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits letters and additional evidence, which do not overcome the 
deficiencies of the petition. Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed for the following reasons. 
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. § 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. 8 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 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. 8 204.5(h)(2). 
We address the evidence submitted and the petitioner's claims in the following discussion of the 
regulatory criteria relevant to the petitioner's case. The petitioner does not claim eligibility under any 
criteria not discussed below. 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in theJield of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of her receipt of the following scholarships to support her studies in 
music education at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia: International Student Leadership 
Award for 2002-2003, Diehn Scholarship first awarded in 2002~~ and Jerome J. Kern Scholarship for 
2001-2002. Scholarships, fellowships and other forms of competitive financial aid do not meet this 
criterion because they are awarded to support academic studies or training and only fellow students, not 
established professionals in the alien's field, are eligible and compete for such aid. Accordingly, the 
petitioner's scholarships do not satisfl this criterion. 
The petitioner also claims that her two-time appearance on the Dean's List at Old Dominion University 
meets this criterion. Academic honors, such as inclusion on a dean's list, reflect scholastic achievement 
and an individual's high-ranking in comparison to other students. Academic honors do not, however, 
demonstrate national or international acclaim as an established professional in a given field. 
1 
 The petitioner submitted evidence of her continued receipt of the Diehn Scholarship and other forms 
of financial aid in response to the director's Request for Evidence (RFE) and on appeal. We cannot 
consider this evidence because it arose after the petition was filed. The petitioner must establish 
eligibility at the time of filing; a petition cannot be approved at a future date after the petitioner 
becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(12), Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N 
Dec. 45,49 (Comm. 1971). 
Page 4 
Although they may be competitive and prestigious, the petitioner's scholarships and inclusion on the 
Dean's List at Old Dominion University do not demonstrate the requisite sustained acclaim as a 
musician at the top of her field. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet 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. 
The petitioner claims to meet this criterion through her past membership in the Moscow Chamber 
Orchestra, The Seasons; the orchestra of the Moscow State Theater, Gelikon; and CREO, the Old 
Dominion University Contemporary Music Ensemble. The record does not support this claim. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that she was a member of The Seasons from 1998 to 2000. On 
appeal, the petitioner states, "Membership in this orchestra required prizewinning at an international 
competition or outstanding performing skills." The submitted evidence concerning The Seasons does 
not support this statement. Simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient to meet the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 
(Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Cornrn. 1972)). 
An undated, blue-bound booklet about the orchestra states, "Today The Seasons Orchestra is 
represented by 20 musicians having [the] highest musical education. Their average age is about thirty." 
ss the orchestra's eligibility or selection criteria. A letter dated in 
, Professor and Pro-Rector at the Ural State Academy of Music, 
confirms that "[alfter graduating from the Academy of Music[, the petitioner] is doing the job she was 
trained for in Moscow." Professor oes not provide any details concerning the petitioner's 
work as a musician in Moscow. H evidence relevant to the petitioner's membership in The 
Seasons does not establish that outstanding achievements, as judged by recognized national or 
international experts, are prerequisite to membership in this orchestra. 
Similarly, the record documents the petitioner's work as a violinist for the Gelikon in Moscow from 
1997 to 1999, but does not demonstrate that outstanding achievements are prerequisite to membership 
in the theater's orchestra. An undated letter signed by the General Manager of the theater and the Chief 
Conductor and Director of the theater's orchestra, states that the petitioner became an orchestra artist of 
the Gelikon "after successfully passing a competition." The letter provides no hrther details regarding 
this competition or the orchestra's eligibility and selection criteria. For example, the letter does not 
state that the competition which the petitioner passed was national in scope and judged by recognized 
national or international orchestral musicians or conductors. Accordingly, the record does not establish 
that outstanding achievements are prerequisite to membership in the Gelikon's orchestra. 
In his letter dated November 18,2003 
I- 
, Associate Professor of Music and Director of 
CREO at Old Dominion University, con irms t e petitioner's membershiv in CREO. 
 Professor 
raises the petitioner's sk-ills, but does not discuss the eligibility'and selection criteria of 
or otherwise indicate that the petitioner was admitted to the ensemble based on her outstanding 
P 
Page 5 
achievements, as judged by recognized national or international experts. In his second letter dated 
April 30, 2005 and submitted on appeal, Professor 
tn 
asserts that the petitioner's work with 
CREO "meets the criterion of belonging to 'associations in 
 e field for which classification is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national of [sic] 
international experts in their disciplines."' This assertion is unsu orted by any discussion of the 
eligibility and selection criteria for CREO in Professor 
C 
second letter or any other 
independent evidence of the ensemble's membership requirements. 
 onsequently, the petitioner does 
not meet 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 the jield for which classification is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
With her Form 1-140, the petitioner submitted excerpts of reviews of performances and one recording 
of The Seasons, but none of these documents mention or identify the petitioner. The petitioner also 
submitted two announcements of her performances with another musician that were published in The 
Virginian-Pilot. These brief listings contain no substantive discussion of the petitioner's work. The 
record is also devoid of any evidence that The Virginian-Pilot is a nationally circulated newspaper or 
otherwise considered a form of major media. The petitioner submitted another announcement of one of 
her performances on an undated printout from the Artsong Update website. Again, the brief 
announcement contains no discussion of the petitioner's work and the record contains no evidence that 
Artsong Update is a professional, major trade publication or a form of major media. 
With her RFE response and on appeal, the petitioner submitted announcements and reviews of her 
performances from Artsong Update and The Virginian-Pilot and other sources. We cannot consider 
this evidence because it arose after the petition was filed. The petitioner must establish eligibility at the 
time of filing; a petition cannot be approved at a future date after the petitioner becomes eligible under 
a new set of facts. See 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2(b)(12), Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the 
petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on apanel, as a judge of the work of 
others in the same or an alliedjield of speczj?cation for which classiJication is sought. 
The petitioner does not claim eligibility under this criterion. We nonetheless note that the record 
contains evidence that the petitioner has taught music at the Greenbrier Christian Academy in 
Chesapeake, Virginia. While her teaching responsibilities undoubtedly include frequent judgment of 
her students' work, such activity does not satisfy this criterion. Duties or activities which nominally 
fall under a given regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. fj 204.5(h)(3) do not demonstrate national or 
international acclaim if they are inherent or routine in the occupation itself, or in a substantial 
proportion of positions within that occupation. The petitioner submitted no evidence that she has 
judged of the work of other musicians in her field in a manner significantly outside the general duties of 
her teaching position and reflective of sustained national or international acclaim. Accordingly, the 
petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientij?~, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signiJicance in the$eld. 
The petitioner submitted numerous letters from individuals with whom she has worked. While such 
letters 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 his or her field beyond the limited number of individuals with 
whom he or 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 sustained national or international 
acclaim. Accordingly, we review the letters as they relate to other evidence of the petitioner's 
contributions. 
In his letter dated November 18, 2003, Professo 
 xplains that he has known and worked 
with the petitioner for over three years. Professo 
 tates that the petitioner has "demonstrated 
exceptionally rare 
 nacity in mastering comp ex contemporary works" as a musician with 
CREO. Professor 
m 
explains that he has "been unable to find anybody equaling [the 
petitioner's] professionalism" in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia. 
 He also praises the 
petitioner's efforts to "bring the best violin works to thousands of people in the area. I know of no 
other violinist in the state of Vir inia making such ambitious projects happen. Her concerts are always 
a huge success." Professor 
e 
es not, however, discuss any original, artistic contributions of 
major significance that the pe 1 loner as made to her 
 er consistent with sustained 
national or international acclaim. Rather, Professor dicates that the petitioner's 
achievements are outstanding only on a regional basis in Virginia. 
a colleague of the petitioner and fellow member of CREO, praises the 
to her "valuable addition to the music community in the Harnpton Roads 
area," but does not discuss any original, major contributions that the petitioner has made to her field in 
a manner consistent with the requisite sustained acclaim. 
e petitioner's supervisor at the Greenbrier Christian Academy, praises the petitioner's 
musical, organizational and teaching skills, but does not indicate that the petitioner has made any 
original contributions of major significance to the field of musical education in a manner consistent 
with sustained national or international acclaim. 
l!mF 
Superintendent of the Greenbrier 
Christian Academy, also p 
 he petitioner's wor 
 or t e sc ool and her community involvement 
through her music, but Mr. 
 does not identify any major contributions that the petitioner has made 
to her field. 
- Associate Professor of Music at Old Dominion University, states that the 
petitioner was a superior student in several of his classes. Professor 
 attests to the petitioner's 
"extraordinary musical talent" and "essential drive," but does not discuss any achievements of the 
petitioner that he considers to be major, original contributions to her field. Similarly, Professo 
m 
of the Ural State Academy of Music in Russia, confirms the petitioner's excellent performance as a 
student but does not attest to any major contributions that the petitioner has made to her field as a 
professional musician or teacher. 
The letter from the Gelikon praises the petitioner's talent, her mastery of the "Italian authentic style," 
and lists her performances with the Gelikon orchestra in Russia and Taiwan. Yet the letter does not 
indicate that the petitioner's work with the Gelikon orchestra made original contributions of major 
significance to her field. 
Concertmaster of the Virginia Symphony and adjunct professor at Old Dominion 
University, states that he has known and taught the petitioner for approximately three years. P 
praises the petitioner as an "excellent violinist with outstanding work habits." mi 
a musician and composer in Harnpton, Virginia, states that he has known the petitioner for 
rn 
about six months and has seen her perform as a violin soloist. Mr. paises the petitioner's talent 
and notes that she "commands the virtuosic works of violin literature and is completely at ease with 
concert-level repertoire." Pastor of the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church in 
Virginia Beach, states that equently performed at the church, that her "musical 
abilities are extraordinary" and that her artistic skills and musical teaching "make significant 
contributions to our community." ssociate Pastor of First Baptist Church of Norfolk, 
Virginia, states that the petitioner as een a mem er of the church's orchestra for a year and recently 
ave an excellent violin concert which featured her tremendous ability and skills." Yet Professor 
e M Pastor 
 and Rev. 
 do not attest to any original, major 
contributions that the petitioner has made to her field in a manner consistent with sustained national or 
international acclaim. 
Other evidence in the record indicates that the petitioner has performed throughout Russia and in 
several countries as a member of The Seasons and the Gelikon orchestras; has frequently performed in 
Virginia as a soloist, part of a duet and with CREO; recorded one compact disc with another musician 
in 2003; and authored an instructional booklet for beginning violinists. Yet the record is devoid of any 
evidence that these achievements were critically acclaimed, significantly influenced other musicians, or 
have otherwise made major contributions to the petitioner's field in a manner consistent with the 
requisite sustained acclaim. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major 
trade publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted copies of two spiral-bound booklets entitled "38 Songs for the Beginning 
Violinist," one of which is captioned "Violin Part" and the other, "Piano Part." The booklets contain 
Page 8 
no publication information and the petitioner submitted no evidence that these booklets have been 
published in professional, major trade publications or other major media. Accordingly, the petitioner 
does not meet this criterion. 
(vig Evidence of the display of the alien S work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
This criterion generally applies to the visual - not performing - arts. We nonetheless address the 
petitioner's eligibility under this criterion given her claim to satisfy this category through the numerous 
documents submitted regarding her musical performances. However, duties or activities which 
nominally fall under a given regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) do not demonstrate national 
or international acclaim if they are inherent or routine in the occupation itself. Frequent performances 
are inherent to the musical profession. The record in this case documents the petitioner's numerous 
musical performances, but fails to establish that any of her performances garnered significant 
recognition in her field reflective of the requisite sustained national or international acclaim. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of her ensemble performances with The Seasons and the Gelikon 
orchestras of Moscow, some of which occurred at prominent venues in Russia and other countries. Yet 
the record contains no evidence that the petitioner was a featured soloist or lead musician with either of 
these orchestras, that her individual work was critically acclaimed, or that her performances were 
otherwise recognized in her field in a manner consistent with sustained national or international 
acclaim. 
The petitioner also submitted numerous programs, fliers and announcements of her various 
performances in Virginia after her arrival in the United States. The majority of these performances 
took place at Old Dominion University and at several churches in Virginia. The record contains no 
evidence that the petitioner was, for example, featured as a soloist at distinguished concert venues in a 
manner consistent with sustained national acclaim in the United States. With her RFE response and on 
appeal, the petitioner submitted additional documentation of her concerts and reviews of some of those 
performances. This evidence arose after the petition was filed and consequently cannot be considered. 
The petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing; a petition cannot be approved at a future 
date after the petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(12), 
Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
The petitioner claims to meet this criterion through her work with The Seasons and CREO. The 
evidence shows that the petitioner was a musician with The Seasons, which the record indicates has a 
distinguished reputation. The evidence does not establish, however, that the petitioner was a lead 
musician, featured soloist or otherwise performed a leading or critical role for The Seasons. In 
addition, the petitioner left this orchestra in 2000, nearly four years before her petition was filed, and 
her work with The Seasons thus does not demonstrate sustained acclaim. 
Page 9 
In his letter dated April 30, 2005 and submitted on appeal, Professo 
 that the petitioner 
performs with CREO as both a soloist and chamber musician. 
 explains that he has 
not found any violinist or violist in the Hampton Roads region who equals the petitioner's 
professionalism and he affirms, "All our innovative endeavors would hardly be possible 
petitioner's] performing. Her role is crucial to our ensemble's future successes." Professor 
concludes that given the petitioner's role in CREO, "there is clearly an [sic] 'evidence that 
performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished 
reputation."' The record does not support his statement. Even if the record established the 
leading or critical role for CREO, the evidence does not demonstrate that this ensemble has a 
distinguished reputation, the petitioner's role in which would reflect national or international acclaim. 
Instead, the record indicates that CREO's reputation is region not extend across the United 
States or internationally. In his April 30,2005 letter, Professo states that CREO is "the only 
professional new-music group in the state of Virginia" and that the ensemble "has been listed in the 
Virginia Commission for the Arts' Tour Directory." The record includes concert programs for CREO 
performances at Old Dominion University, but at 
 in Virginia or other states or 
countries. These programs, combined with statements, indicate that CREO's 
reputation does not extend beyond the state of the petitioner fails to meet this 
criterion. 
On appeal, the petitioner requests consideration of her teaching and instructional booklet as comparable 
evidence of her eligibility. Comparable evidence will only be considered when the evidentiary criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) "do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation." The petitioner has not 
explained or documented how the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) do not readily apply to her 
occupation as a musician and music teacher. To the contrary, the record indicates that at least seven of 
the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) are applicable to the petitioner's profession. Moreover, we have 
considered the evidence regarding the petitioner's musical teaching and her instructional booklets in 
our above discussions of the fourth, fifth, and sixth criteria. 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act 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 has achieved sustained national or international 
acclaim as a musician or music teacher 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 1 153(b)(l)(A), and her 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. 5 1361. Here, 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, with 
the requisite supporting evidence, under section 203(b)(2) of the Act. 
Page 10 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.