dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 7375471 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 11, 2020 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner , a folk singer, seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. See Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A) , 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the Petitioner did not 
satisfy any of the initial evidentiary criteria , of which she must meet at least three. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establi sh eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review , we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )( 1) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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 tenn "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 a multi-part analysis . First , a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through 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 sufficient qualifying 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 meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether 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. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner sings Serbian folk music. Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that 
she has received a major, internationally recognized award, she must satisfy at least three of the 
alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
In denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner did not fulfill any of the initial 
evidentiary criteria. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief claiming to meet seven criteria. After 
reviewing all of the evidence, we conclude that the record does not support a finding that the Petitioner 
satisfies the requirements of at least three criteria. 
Documentation of the alien 's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the.field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
The Petitioner argues that she meets this criterion based on her receipt of a "Silver Album" award 
from Radio Television! I a "Plaque" from the Association of Performing Arts (APA), and a 
"Trophy Award" from Hit Parade '85. In order to fulfill this criterion, the Petitioner must demonstrate 
that she received the prizes or awards, and they are nationally or internationally recognized for 
excellence in the field of endeavor. 1 Relevant considerations regarding whether the basis for granting 
the prizes or awards was excellence in the field include, but are not limited to, the criteria used to grant 
the prizes or awards, the national or international significance of the prizes or awards in the field, and 
the number of awardees or prize recipients as well as any limitations on competitors. 2 
The record reflects that the Petitioner presented evidence of her receipt of the awards. Although the 
Petitioner explains why she received the awards, she does not demonstrate their national or 
international recognition for excellence in the field. For instance, the Petitioner claims that the Silver 
Album "is for the sale of 25,000 albums which is a substantial number of albums for a country the size 
of Serbia." While the Petitioner references a letter froml I who claimed that the album 
sold "12.500 pieces" and not 25,000, the letter only confirms the receipt of the award without showing 
the field's view as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence. 
1 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form I-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADJ 1-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. 
2 Id. 
2 
Furthermore, the Petitioner asserts that the AP A Plaque "was awarded by the biggest association for 
performing arts," and the Trophy Award "was given to the most popular singers in former 
Yugoslavia." However, the record does not contain, nor the Petitioner reference, any corroborating 
evidence to support her claims. Moreover, the Petitioner did not show that the AP A Plaque and Trophy 
Award are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field. 
Because the Petitioner did not demonstrate that she received nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field, she did not establish that she meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien 's membership in associations in the field for which 
class[fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
The Petitioner asserts eligibility for this criterion based on membership with Maestro International 
(MI). In order to satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner must show that membership in the association is 
based on being judged by recognized national or international experts as having outstanding 
achievements in the field for which classification is sought. 3 
At the outset, the Petitioner did not claim eligibility for this criterion at initial filing. However, in 
response to the Director's request for evidence JRFE), the Petitioner indicated membership with 
Maestro International and provided a letter from I who confirmed the 
Petitioner's membership since 2014. In denying the petition, the Director found that the Petitioner did 
not submit evidence that the association requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged 
by recognized national or international experts. Moreover, the Director indicated that the Petitioner 
did not provide the association's constitution or bylaws. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that 
"USCIS never sought this information in their Request for Evidence and it is therefore unfair for them 
to partially base their decision on the fact that this evidence was not included." However, as the 
Petitioner did not initially claim eligibility for this criterion, she did not explain how the Director could 
have known to request specific evidence for Maestro International. 
Notwithstanding the above, according tol I the Petitioner competed in the festival, 
~-----~I 2014," and the jury determined her composition "[a]s the most successful." 
Therefore, the Petitioner "earned the right of membership." However, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that winning a folk festival contest is tantamount to an outstanding achievement 
consistent with this regulatory criterion. In addition, as indicated, the Petitioner did not provide 
supporting documentation, such as the bylaws of Maestro International, to corroborate the claims of 
I I and establish the membership requirements. Moreover, the Petitioner did not show 
that membership is judged by recognized national or international experts. 
For these reasons, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that she fulfills this criterion. 
3 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005 .1, supra, at 6 (providing an example of admission to membership in the 
National Academy of Sciences as a Foreign Associate that requires individuals to be nominated by an academy member, 
and membership is ultimately granted based upon recognition of the individual's distinguished achievements in original 
research). 
3 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any 
necessary translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
In order to satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner must demonstrate published material about her in 
professional or major trade publications or other major media, as well as the title, date, and author of 
the material. 4 At initial filing, the Petitioner submitted translations of articles from Commonalty, 
magazinetrendy.net (2), svet.rs, expresstabloid.ba, Sezam Magazine, and serbiamirror.com reflecting 
published material about her and her work. 5 However, with the exception of the articles from 
Commonalty and serbiamirror.com, the Petitioner's translations did not include the required dates 
and/or authors of the material. In addition, the Petitioner provided the translations of two articles from 
unidentified publications, which also did not include the required dates and authors. 
Moreover, in response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner submitted translations of articles from 
grand.online and svetaustralia.com (2). We note, however, that the translation for the article from 
grand.online did not contain the required author of the material. Furthermore, the articles were 
published after the filing of her petition. The Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements 
for the immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of filing and continuing through 
adjudication. See 8 C.F .R. § 103.2(b )(1 ). Accordingly, we will not consider this evidence to determine 
the Petitioner's eligibility in this proceeding. 
In addition, although the Petitioner asserts that "the articles submitted should be viewed in a favorable 
light since they are from publications that have significant national or international distribution," the 
record does not contain evidence to support this assertion, nor does she reference any documentation. 
Further, the Petitioner argues that the Director erroneously determined that she "should have included 
sufficient supporting documentation, such as circulation statistics for other publications to establish 
that the web portals are professional or major trade publications or other major medias [sic] when they 
never asked for such documentation in their Request for Evidence. "6 Moreover, she claims that she 
"was not aware that the USCIS required this documentation and was put in an unfair position." On 
the contrary, a review of the Director's RFE reflects that he specifically indicated: 
To assist in determining that the publications qualify as professional or major trade publications 
or other major media, you may submit evidence indicating: 
• [T]he title, date, and author of the published material. 
• [T]he circulation ( online and/or in print). 
4 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005 .1, supra, at 7. 
5 The Petitioner also submitted partial foreign language articles without any English language translations. Any document 
in a foreign language must be accompanied by a full English, certified language translation. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.2(b)(3) 
and 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
6 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 7 (indicating that evidence of published material in 
professional or major trade publications or in other major media publications should establish that the circulation ( on-line 
or in print) is high compared to other circulation statistics and show who the intended audience of the publication is, as 
well as the title, date, and author of the material). 
4 
• [C]omparative circulation data of major publications in the field. 
• [T]he intended audience of the publication. 
Although she submitted two articles reflecting published material about her relating to her work in the 
field, which include the required title, date, and author, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that 
Commonalty and serbiamirror.com are professional or major trade publications or other major media. 7 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not establish that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scient[fic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sign[ficance in the field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
The Petitioner contends that she submitted recommendation letters reflecting her contributions of 
major significance in the field. In order to meet the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), a petitioner 
must establish that not only has she made original contributions but that they have been of major 
significance in the field. 8 For example, a petitioner may show that the contributions have been widely 
implemented throughout the field, have remarkably impacted or influenced the field, or have otherwise 
risen to a level of major significance in the field. 
The record reflects that the Petitioner's recommendation letters confirm her performances and 
recordings. For instance, the letters state that:" the Petitioner's] compositions are broadcasted daily 
on radio and television programs" .__ _____ _,, "[ the Petitioner] recorded three albums for the 
production company gramophone long plays" (Radio Television of Serbia), "[the Petitioner] produced 
two CDs" and "performed at more than 500 musical concerts throught [sic] out the I I and 
Europe" (Grand Production), and "[the Petitioner] has recorded numerous [a]lbums," "recorded with 
some of the biggest recording studios in Serbia," and "has 9 recorded albums" (the Association of 
Performing Artists and Performers of Serbia). 9 However, the letters do not establish how the 
Petitioner's performances and recordings are viewed by the field as original contributions of major 
significance in the field. The letters, for instance, do not explain how the Petitioner has significantly 
impacted the field in a major way consistent with this regulatory criterion. 
Moreover, the letters praise the Petitioner's skills and talents. For example, "[o]ne of the most 
emotional singers of country and folk music on our program is [the Petitioner]" l I Production), 
"all her songs are of exceptional quality and sought after" and "[the Petitioner] has great vocal skills 
and ranked among the best singers" (Serbian Radio Hour), "[the Petitioner is] a superior singer that 
has lasted for years, [ and] until today, her songs are sought out and listened both in Serbia and in 
America" (Serbian Mirror), "[the Petitioner] is widely renowned for her exquisitely expressive voice 
and deep stylistic understanding of various regional styles of the folk music of the Balkans" ~ 
I I, and "[ the Petitioner's] expressive voice, high aesthetic standards, wide repertoire, and 
professionalism as a performer make her a central figure in the musical life of the Serbian-American 
community" I l Having a diverse, unique, or special skill set, however, is not 
7 The Petitioner also did not provide evidence establishing that grand.online and svetaustralia qualify as professional or 
major trade publications or other major media. 
8 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 8-9 (finding that although funded and published work may 
be "original," this fact alone is not sufficient to establish that the work is of major significance). 
9 Although we discuss a sampling of letters, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
5 
a contribution of major significance in-and-of-itself Further, the record must be supported by 
evidence that the Petitioner has already used those skills and talents to impact the field at a significant 
level, which she has not shown. In addition, the letters do not demonstrate how the Petitioner's talents 
and skills have been a major influence in the overall field. 10 
Here, the Petitioner's letters do not contain specific, detailed information identifying her original 
contributions and explaining the unusual influence her musical work has had on the overall field. 
Letters that specifically articulate how a petitioner's contributions are of major significance in the field 
and its impact on subsequent work add value. 11 On the other hand, letters that lack specifics and use 
hyperbolic language do not add value, and are not considered to be probative evidence that may form 
the basis for meeting this criterion. 12 Moreover, USCIS need not accept primarily conclusory 
statements. 1756, Inc. v. The US. Att'y Gen., 745 F. Supp. 9, 15 (D.C. Dist. 1990). 
For the reasons discussed above, considered both individually and collectively, the Petitioner has not 
shown that she has made original contributions of major significance in the field. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
The Petitio
1
er argu
1
es eligibility for this criterion based on her roles with Maestro International, Grand 
Production, Production, and Radiol I As it relates to a leading role, the evidence must 
establish that a petitioner is or was a leader. A title, with appropriate matching duties, can help to 
establish if a role is or was, in fact, leading. 13 Regarding a critical role, the evidence must demonstrate 
that a petitioner has contributed in a way that is of significant importance to the outcome of the 
organizations or establishment's activities. It is not the title of a petitioner's role, but rather the 
performance in the role that determines whether the role is or was critical. 14 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that she: "has performed for [Maestro International]," "was a 
special guest on the tour of several artists and that together they have done over 500 concerts in former 
Yugoslavia and Europe" and "recorded two compact discs" for Grand Production, "led I I 
I l's] New Year musical show id O J' and "gain[ed] the coveted position of soloist on 
Radio I t' Although the Petitioner references recommendation letters, previously discussed 
above, which confirm her performances and recordings, the letters do not contain detailed information 
demonstrating that she performed in a leading or critical role as a whole. 15 
10 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 8-9; see also Visinscaia, 4 F. Supp. 3d at 134-35 (upholding 
a finding that a ballroom dancer had not met this criterion because she did not corroborate her impact in the field as a 
whole). 
11 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 8-9. 
12 Id. at 9. See also Kazarian, 580 F.3d at 1036, aff din pait 596 F.3d at 1115 (holding that letters that repeat the regulatory 
language but do not explain how an individual's contributions have already influenced the field are insufficient to establish 
original contributions of major significance in the field). 
13 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, supra, at 10. 
14 Id. 
15 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, supra, at 10 (providing that this is one criterion where letters from 
individuals with personal knowledge of the significance of the alien's leading or critical role can be particularly helpful to 
USCTS officers in making this determination as long as the letters contain detailed and probative information that 
6 
For instance, the letters from Maestro International and I I Production did not explain how 
performing at a single event, either at a festival or at a New Year's program, reflected the Petitioner's 
overall leading or critical role to the organizations. Moreover, the letter from Grand Production did 
not establish how her role as a special guest at concerts represented a leading role or resulted in the 
success or standing of the organization. Further, the letter from Radio I ldid not elaborate 
regarding the Petitioner's "soloist status" and how such position indicated a leading role to the station 
overall or elevated the station's status. Here, the lack of specific information does not provide 
probative information to demonstrate the Petitioner's leading or critical roles for the organizations. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner did not establish that any of these organizations enjoy a distinguished 
reputation. 16 Although each recommendation letter provided brief background information, the 
Petitioner did not offer any supporting documentation to corroborate the claims. For example, Maestro 
International indicated that it was "established on 2005 - year as a non-partisan, non-profit association, 
and to achieve the objectives in the field of musical creativity and interpretation." Moreover, Grand 
Production asserted that it "is established in 1988 - year the most prestigious production company in 
the Balkans" and "it's viewed [by] over 7,000,000 million [sic] people." Further, I !Production 
claimed that "[ o ]ne can boast that a number of TV shows were produced and broad casted on numerous 
stations across the region ... as well as many records released with a very popular local performers 
of folk music." In addition, Radio I I stated that "the [r]adio and the [t]elevision, are 
broadcasting in 15 different languages" and the programs are watched and listened by 14 million 
people. Again, the Petitioner did not submit corroborating evidence, nor did she demonstrate the 
significance of the statements or figures. Here, the Petitioner did not include evidence, for example, 
showing the field's view of the organizations, how their reputations compare to similar establishments, 
or how their successes or accomplishments relate to others, signifying a distinguished reputation 
consistent with the regulatory criterion. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not establish that she satisfies this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
We find that the Petitioner does not satisfy the criteria relating to awards, memberships, published 
material, original contributions, and leading or critical role. Although she submits evidence for two 
additional criteria on appeal, relating to judging at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and artistic display at 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii), we need not reach these additional grounds. As the Petitioner cannot fulfill 
the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), we reserve these 
issues. 17 Accordingly, we need not provide the type of final merits determination referenced in 
Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise that we have reviewed the record in the 
aggregate, concluding that it does not support a finding that the Petitioner has established the acclaim 
and recognition required for the classification sought. 
specifically addresses how the alien's role for the organization or establishment was leading or critical). 
16 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, supra, at 10-11 (defining Merriam-Webster's Dictionary definition 
of"distinguished" as marked by eminence, distinction, or excellence). 
17 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like comts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach). 
7 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held 
that even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953, 954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of her work is indicative of the required sustained national or 
international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )(l)(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in the field, and she is one of the small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act and 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
Although the Petitioner has sung and performed Serbia folk music, the record does not contain 
sufficient evidence establishing that she is among the upper echelon in her field. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her eligibility as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
8