dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF L-E-S-L-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 15, 2019 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a Latin reggae musician, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability 
in the arts. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(1 )(A). This first preference classification makes immigrant visas available to those who 
can demonstrate their extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and 
whose achievements have been recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Petitioner had satisfied only two of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of 
which he must m~et at least three: · · 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation and a brief, arguing that he ·meets at least 
three of the ten criteria. 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) 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 m the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's eritry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individu.als in "that small percel}tage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation . . 
.
Matter of L-E-S-L-
at 8 C.F.R. · § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth two options for satisfying this classification_'s initial evidence 
requirements. First, a petitioner can demonstrate 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 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 aw;rds, published material in certain media, and 
scholarly articles). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) allows a petitioner to submit comparable 
material if he or she is able to demonstrate that the standards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) do not· 
readily apply to the individual's occupation. 
Where a· petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
materiat' 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. USC!S, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 20 l 0) 
( discussing a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination); see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). This two-step analysis is cOnsistent with our holding that the "truth is to be 
determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality," as well as the principle that we 
examine "each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually 
and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is 
probably true." Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record shows that the Petitioner, whose professional name 1s or 
is a Latin reggae musician who was a 
percussionist for the Venezuelan reggae band 
released the albums 
new band. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
(2010), After 
, and released the album 
founding member, lead singer, composer and 
from 1 998 unti I it disbanded in 2012. 1 
(2002), (2007), and 
disbanded the Petitioner formed a 
(2016). 
As the record does not establish that the Petitioner has received a major, internationally recognized 
award, he must satisfy at least· three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)­
(x). · The Director held 'that the Petitioner met only two of the initial evidentiary criteria, published 
material under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), and judging under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv). On appeal, 
the Petitioner maintains that he meets six additional . criteria, awards, membership in associations, 
significant contributions, display, critical or leading role, and commercial success at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii), (v), (vii), (viii) and (x); respectively, and that he is among the small p~rcentage 
1 There is some inconsistency in the record as to when disbanded. The Petitioner's resume indicates that 
thi.s'event occurred in 20 IO while on appeal the Petitioner asserts it was in 2012. 
2 
.
Matter of L-E-S-L-
at the very top of the field of endeavor. Here, we find _that the record establishes he meets three 
criteria to warrant a final merits detem1ination .. 
Specifically, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner meets the criteria for published material 
and judging. The record contains several published articles that are about the Petitioner, relating to 
his performances with, and the circulation statistics provided demonstrate that the 
publications qualify as major media, as required under the regulation. 2 In addition, the documentary 
evidence indicates that he served as a judge for the 2012 awards and as a 
member of the jury for the 2013 awards. We also find that the Petitioner,has 
satisfied the display criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). The evidence submitted of the 
Petitioner's performance before audiences _at concerts and other music events fulfills this criterion. 
This demonstrates that the Petitioner meets three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
As the Petitioner has satisfied the initial evidentiary requirements, we will evaluate the totality of the 
evidence, including the documentation relating to other criteria he has claimed, in the context of the 
final merits determination below. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the Petitioner has submitted the requisite initial evidence, we will evaluate whether the record 
demonstrates, by a preponderance of .the evidence, that he has sustained national or international 
acclaim and is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor; and that his 
achievements· have. been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. See section 
203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2)-(3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. In 
this matter, we determine that the Petitioner has not established that he has sustained national or 
international acclaim. 
With respect to awards, within its response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the 
Petitioner included documentation that he received the 201 l award as Singer with the 
Most Impact of the Year with a Great International Projection.-' He submitted a letter dated 2011 
from _____ president of who provides general 
2 For example, reviews and articles about the Beneficiary and his work with appear to have been 
published in Rolling Stone magazine and in the Venezuelan publication El Naciona/. Although not addressed by the 
Director, we note that the Petitioner submitted translations ol'several other li:neign-language articles that cki not comply 
with the regulation, as they clearly omit sentences or passages from the foreign language document. See 8 C.F.R, § 
103.2(b)(3). Accordingly, these translations have significantly diminished probative value. Other articles submitted do 
not meet the plain language r'equirements of the published material criterion because they do not include the date and 
author of the material. 
3 The record also contains evidence that he received the 2017 after the date when _the petition was 
filed on October 6, 2016. The Petitioner must establish that all eiigibility requirements for the immigration benefit have 
been satisfied from 'the time of the filing and continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. * I 03 .2(b )( 1 ). Furthermore, the 
record does not include sufficient evidence to _demonstrate that this award is recognized at a level _consistent with 
national or international acclaim. · 
3 
.
,/, 
Matter of L-E-S-L-
information about the foundation, and asserts that the award is "the only award that is 
certified in the country," and that it enjoys "the Most Continuous Credibility at a Regional, National, 
and International level." He also indicates that the award is a local event, given in 
based upon "the verdict from the people of according to the results from the polls 
taken in different communicatio~ media, the Mayor's office ... walking polls, and other means 
of information." On appeal, the Petitioner provides an additional letter from dated 
2018, indica~ing that the Petitioner was the only artist in the '" cultural reggae' genre" to receive the 
award for Singer with the Most Impact of the Year with a Great International Projection. 4 He further 
explains that the organization does not have established award categories, and "[t]he number of 
awards changes every year depend.ing on how the market develops." While the Petitioner's award 
. shows that he was recognized by the the Petitioner did not 
submit evidence of the national or international recognition of his such as national or 
widespread local coverage of his award in arts, ente11ainment, or general media, shO\ying that the 
award was recognized beyond the presenting organization. Tl1e Petitioner, therefore, has not shown 
that his receipt of the award in 2011 is indicative of the required national or 
international acclaim in the field. 
Regarding the Petitioner's membership in associations, he contends that his membership in the 
demoi1strates his "sustained national acclaim." However, as he acknowledges 
on appeal, the record indicates his membership in this organization began on March 2 7, 2018, after 
the date the petition was filed on October 6, 2016. As stated previously, the Petitioner must establish 
that all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of the 
filing and continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l ). Thus, the Petitioner cannot 
establish that he possessed the required acclaim at the time of filing with membership in an 
organization that began after that date. Nor has the Petitioner sufficiently documented the 
· significance or prestige of his memb~rship to demonstrate that it 
contributes to a finding of sustained national or international .acclaim continuing through 
adjudication. 
For published material, the record contains a favorable review of 2002 debut album 
!hat appears to have been published in a foreign language edition of Rolling 
Stone. An additional article in El Nacional announces that album's release, mentions the 
participation of notable reggae artists and in the recording, and notes 
the band's growing popularity in South America and Jamaica. Other articles"'discuss the success of 
between 2003 and 2010, including the positive response to the band's 
While indicative of recognition during this period, those 
materials do 'not demonstrate that the Petitioner, as an . individual, has enjoyed national or 
international acclaim performing with his ·new .band between 2012 and October 2016, 
when he filed the instant petition. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that although 
disbanded in 2012, he "continued to shine and be recognized as a Latin Reggae Artist' in his own 
4 The materials accompanying letter indicate the organization changed its name in 2016 to 
4 
.
Matter of L-E-S-L-
right." In support of t_his contention he cites to his performance in concerts between 2013 and 2015 
at "some of most famous venues such as ... and ' and his release of 
the CD . However, the record does not show that the level of 
success the Petitioner has had from 2012 onward has brought him national or international acclaim 
in his field. Therefore, the evidence in the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner has 
sustained national or international acclaim after his participation in 
With respect to judging, the two certificates submitted pertain to the Petitioner's judging experiences 
for the 2012 awards, and as a member of the jury for the 2013 
A'.s previously discussed, the above-mentioned letter from indicates 
that the award that the Petitioner judged was a local event, given in based 
upon "the verdict from the people of according to the results from the polls taken in different 
communication media, the Mayor's office ... walking polls, and other means of information." 
A press release describes the awards as an annual, two-day Venezuelan music 
festival that awards the "top acts" from that year's festivals, which are monthly, 
regional music festivals "in the main squares of Venezuela." On appeal, the Petitioner provides 
press releases advertising upcoming events in 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2016, 
published on the websites www.theelitechannel.blogspot.com, www.lapatilla.com, and 
www.lamegaestacion.com www.el~nacional.com. Without supporting evidence showing, for 
instance, the level of national or international prestige associated with these competitions, we cannot 
conclude that_ serving as a judge for them is commensurate with sustained "national or international 
acclaim" at the very top of the field. Moreover, we note that the Petitioner has submitted evidence 
of his participation as a judge for only two competitions, in 2012 and 2013 respectively. The statute and 
regulations, however, require "extensive documentation," and for the petitioner to demonstrate that his 
national or international acclaim has been sustained. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ l 153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The documentation submitted for 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv), considered as part of the record as a whole, is not extensive or commensurate with 
sustained national or international acclaim. 
On appeal, for the first time, the Petitioner claims that he satisfies the contributions criterion, based 
on letters of recommendation from his former band members and colleagues in the field. First, he 
indicates this evidence demonstrates acclaim as the first ' in 
Venezuela." __ an Argentine reggae musician self-described as the "founder of cultural 
· reggae in all of Latin America," describes the Petitioner as "the founder of m 
Venezuela." of the , calls 
Venezuela's" a reggae musician , indicates that 
while "there were important reggae-bands in Latin America before . . . . . is the first 
Next, the Petitioner asserts the letters demonstrate impact and influence, especially. 
in being .the first reggae band __ , bringing "this hallmark of reggae music to 
Venezuela ."' · a Jamaican-Canadian reggae musician , and a 
Venezuelan r~ggae musician , credit the_ band with contributing to the popularity of reggae music in 
I 
5 
.
Matter of L-E-S-L-
Venezuela. Letters form a former member of 
claim that the band's ===== "defined the history of reggae in the 
country." ===== -===- .· another former member of asserts 
that the song ' from ___ "was the most played song on the radio 
at the time." In addition, an undated letter from with the Venezuelan radio station 
indicates that the theme composed by [the Petitioner] and 
.. is the Venezuelan reggae song with the most rotation in our radio Circuit." However, the 
Petitioner has not established how the radio play of the song equates to his 
sustained national or international acclaim .. For example, the record does not include sufficient 
evidence to corroborate the statements regarding the past radio play of the song, nor does it 
demonstrate how much current radio play this song receives or to what extent the Petitioner has 
received acclaim for this from 2012 until October 2016: 
Finally, the Petitioner cites to the 2003 atiicle in El Nacional titled 
which indicates that at the time of their debut album, the band had 
. already "achieved considerable popularity in South America and Jamaica itself." 5 We acknowledge 
the success had until they disbanded in 2012. · Although the evidence submitted shows. 
the Petitioner received recognition from the field as a member of , and that he was an 
active reggae musician as of the date the petition was filed in October 2016, it does not establish that 
he has sustained national or international acclaim as a member of ___ since 2012. 
Regarding the showcasing of the Petitioner's music in concerts; the record reflects that he was the 
lead singer for between 1998 and · 2012, when it disbanded. Between 2013 and 
October 2016 when the instant petition was filed, the Petitioner performed with his new band, 
at venues predominantly in Florida. He has n'ot shown how the concerts he performed with 
brought national or international acclaim to him. -While frequent performances are 
inherent to the musical profession, the regulation requires that evidence demonstrate sustained 
national or international acclaim, and not simply document a petitioner's continued employment or 
activity in his or her field. In this case, while the record documents the Petitioner's performances at 
concerts and festivals, the evidence does not establish that the festivals or concerts mentioned in the 
flyers advertising the events are of such a stature that participation in them might demonstrate 
national or international acclaim. Therefore, this evidence has not established that the Petitioner has 
enjoyed sustained acclaim as a result of his performances with 
As to his leading or critical role, the Petitioner asserts that the previously discussed letters, including 
those from former band members and 
5 The Petitioner also cites to the transcript ofan interview he conducted in 2018 with the Venezuelan radio 
station Circuito X, in which he discussed his work with · and ~s a solo artist, as well as upcoming projects. 
As previously discussed, however, the Petitioner must establish that. all eligibility requirements for the immigration 
benefit have been satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § I03.2(b)(l). 
· Thus, the Petitioner cannot establish eligibility with the interview that was published after the filing of the instant 
petition. · 
6 
.
Matter of L-E-S-L-
establish the Petitioner played a lead and critical role in as a founding 
member, composer, and lead singer. We acknowledge the Petitioner's rnle as lead singer for 
from 1998 to 2012, however,ias discussed previously, the record does not demonstrate that 
he has enjoyed sustained national or international acclaim as a result of his performances with 
The Petitioner also asserts that he played a "leading role in the Latin Rastafarian community 
as a Latin American ambassador and cultural representative," in helping to "spread the Rastafarian 
message to Latin America through his reggae music." He cites to his participation in the 2007 
· exhibit, as discussed in two letters from a 
cultural anthropologist with the He .also highlights his attendance at the 
2005 in Panama, as mentioned in a letter from 
of the The Petitioner has not demonstrated, however, how the Latin 
Rastafarian community constitutes an organization or establishment with a distinguished reputation 
in·-the Petitioner's field of reggae music, or otherwise shown how this evidence co~tributes to a 
finding of sustained national or international acclaim. 
With respect to commercial success, the Petitioner ' s initial evidence included a letter from 
a manager with the of Venezuela, stating that 
the Petitioner "with his band has sold more than l 0,000 copies," and describing him . 
as "a renowned singer and songwriter." As noted by the Director, · letter does not 
specify whether "copies" refers to albums. Assuming that it does, did not explain what 
information she used to derive her statement regardingJhe band's record sales, nor did the Petitioner 
offer evidence of the band's commercial successes through receipts or sales. The Petitioner also · 
provided documentation for 2009 and 2013 from the 
showing international certification levels for album unit sales, indicating that in 
Venezuela an album that sells 5,000 units will be certified gold, while one that sells I 0,000 units will 
· be certified platinum. · · 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner provided further- documentation of 
internatii:mal certification levels for 2007, and the above-referenced letters froth 
and asserting that the albums have 
been "Gold" albums , each selling more than 5,000 albums. However, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate / that any of albums have enjoyed unit sales at levels that reflect 
commercial successes compared to other musicians. Further, while we acknowledge that those 
albums have enjoyed a level of commercial success, and the Petitioner ' s·role in the band, the record 
reflects that the band dissolved in 2012, after which the Petitioner performed on his own. He has not 
shown that he subsequently enjoyed commercial success in the field with his new band 
that resulted in sustained national or international acclaim. 
UL CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not established that he is eligible as an individual 
of extraordinary ability under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
Matter of L~E-S-L-
ORDER:· The appeal is dismissed. --
Cite as Matter of L-E-S:-L-; ID# 2018580 (AAO Feb. 15, 2019) 
8 \