dismissed EB-1A Case: Performing Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-B-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 12,2017 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a performing artist, 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)(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 Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Petitioner had satisfied only one of the initial evidentiary criteria, of 
which she must meet at least three. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation a brief~ stating that she meets at least 
three criteria. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(1)(A) of the Act makes visas available to qualified 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. 
Matter of A-B-
The term "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 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). Alternately, he or she must provide documentation that meets at 
least three of the ten categories of evidence 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. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 201 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, 13 r-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 Petitioner is a singer, dancer, and actress, who has performed in concerts, productions, and 
plays. 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 found that the Petitioner met only 
the leading or critical role criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 1 
On appeal, the Petitioner specifically contests two criteria: awards under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) 
and judging under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv). In addition, the Petitioner discusses evidence that 
relates to the membership criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii), published material under 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), and artistic display under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). We have reviewed 
all of the evidence in the record, and it does not support a finding that the Petitioner satisfies at least 
three criteria. 2 
1 At the initial filing of the petition and in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner did not 
specify which criteria she claimed to meet. Accordingly, the Director reviewed the Petitioner's documentation and 
determined to which criteria the evidence best pertained. 
2 Although the Petitioner suggests that she should appear before us to further discuss her documentation, we decline her 
request for oral argument. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(b). 
2 
.
\:> 
Matter of A-B-
A. Evidentiary 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 contends that she meets this criterion based on her award granted by the 
The record indicates that the Petitioner submitted 
a certificate reflecting that she received second place in the college junior level division at the 
She also provided screenshots from 
website stating that the association "is the largest professional association of in the 
world with nearly 7,000 members," and students of members have the opportunity to compete at 
national singing competitions, such as the the 
and the In order to meet this regulatory criterion, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate that she received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for 
excellence in her field of endeavor. Here, she did not establish that her award is recognized 
nationally or internationally as an award for excellence in the field. 
/ 
In addition, the Petitioner argues that she satisfies this criterion based on her receipt of ' 
by The Petitioner submitted a 
screenshot from announcing that it named the film, as 
the ' and listing the cast members, including the Petitioner. 
However, the Petitioner did not establish that the award is nationally or internationally recognized 
for excellence consistent with this regulatory criterion. 
Although not contested on appeal, the Director mentioned other awards that he concluded did not 
satisfy this regulatory criterion. The record indicates that the Petitioner provided a photograph of an 
trophy for third place at ' '' and a photograph of a ' · medal for ' 
in a musical theater performance. Neither photograph lists the Petitioner as the recipient, nor 
did the Petitioner present supporting evidence showing her receipt of the awards. Moreover, the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate that they are nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards 
for excellence in the field. In addition, the Petitioner presented schol~rship and academic awards, 
such as the for excellence in the study of Italian at that are 
not indicative of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in her field 
of performing artistry. For these reasons, the Petitioner did not show that she satisfies 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). 
In her cover letters at the initial filing of the petition and in response to the Director's RFE, the 
Petitioner discussed how she was working towards becoming a member of the 
On appeal, the Petitioner 
asserts that she will "shortly become a member of the highly selective which is 
3 
.
Matter of A-B-
the most in the ' 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. § I 03.2(b )(1 ). In the case here, the Petitioner has not 
shown that she was or is a member of nor has she demonstrated with supporting 
evidence that membership with this union requires outstanding achievements, as judged by 
recognized national or international experts. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not shown that she 
meets this criterion. 
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 necessarytranslation. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
The Petitioner argues that she provided articles written in various newspapers regarding her three 
shows. In order to meet this criterion, the Petitioner must demonstrate published 
material about her in professional or major trade publications or other major media. The record 
contains screenshots from various websites, . such as 
and The screenshots, however, either list her as a 
cast member for productions without specifically discussing her or announce the details of upcoming 
shows that do not mention her. Articles that do not pertain to a petitioner do not meet this regulatory 
criterion. See, e.g , Negro-Plumpe v. Okin, 2:07-CV-820-ECR-RJJ at *1, *7 (D. Nev. Sept. 8, 2008) 
(upholding a finding that articles regarding a show are not about the actor). Moreover, the Petitioner 
did not establish that the websites are professional or major trade publications or other major media. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has not shown that she satisfies this regulatory criterion. 
Evidence of the alien 's participation , either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work (~f 
others in the same or an allied field of spec~fication for which classffication is sought. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv). 
The Petitioner indicates that she submitted evidence showing that she been teaching various 
performing arts at Further, the Petitioner states that her 
"[h]igh level of professionalism and skill were the reasons [she] was hired to work at 
marking [sic] me as someone fully able to judge the work of others within the various fields of the 
performing arts." The record includes the Petitioner's course teaching transcripts and brochures and 
pamphlets for 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) requires "[e}vidence of the alien's participation, either 
individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of 
specification for which classification is sought." Serving as an instructor in a classroom setting and 
evaluating students in an informal capacity as part of one's job duties does not equate to 
participation as a judge of the work of others .in the field. The phrase "a judge" implies a formal 
designation in a judging capacity, either on a panel or individually, as specified by the regulatory 
4 
.
Matter of A-B-
criterion. Without supporting evidence showing that she participated as a judge, the Petitioner has 
not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the .field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). 
The record reflects that the Petitioner has displayed her work on 
stage at concerts and theaters. For 
example, the Petitioner was an actress in the short film, which was featured at the 
Accordingly, the Petitioner satisfies this criterion. 
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 Director determined that the Petitioner met this criterion because "[i]t appears that the 
[Petitioner] played a supporting role that was determined to be critical to the production of " 
Based on a review of the record, we must withdraw the Director's decision for this criterion. In 
general, a leading role is evidenced from the role itself, and a critical role is one in which a petitioner 
was responsible for the success or standing of the organization or establishment. 
· The Petitioner provided recommendation letters from individuals involved with her plays and shows 
and supported the record with programs and playbills. Regarding her performance in the 
Petitioner has not shown that her character role was leading or critical to an organization or 
establishment that has a distinguished reputation. Although her role was leading in the film, the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate how her performance in a movie demonstrates her role for an 
organization or establishment. Moreover, even if the Petitioner demonstrated that the production 
itself constituted an organization or establishment, she did not establish that enjoys a 
distinguished reputation. 
Similarly, the record also contains evidence of the Petitioner's roles in other plays and shows, such 
as and These 
roles, as stated in her brief, were "supporting roles," and were not indicative of leading roles. 
Moreover, the Petitioner did not corroborate the record demonstrating that they were critical roles, 
such as showing that her performances were important to the organizations' successes. Further, the 
Petitioner did not establish the distinguished reputations of the relevant organizations or 
establishments. 
In addition, the Petitioner refers to her performances in music videos for and 
as well as singing with Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how 
her performances in music videos and singing with another artist indicate a leading or critical role 
for an organization or establishment. Regarding the music videos, the documentation reflects that 
the Petitioner appeared as an extra, and she did not show that her role was a leading or critical one. 
Further, although the Petitioner provides a playlist of songs on the Petitioner 
did not demonstrate that any of her collaborated songs were produced or posted to the playlist. 
5 
Matter of A-B-
Because the Petitioner did not establish that she meets this criterion, we withdraw the Director's 
determination on this issue. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, 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 level of expertise required for the classification sought. For the 
foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not shown that she qualifies for classification as an individual 
of extraordinary ability. 
ORDER: The appeahis dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of A-B-, ID# 407091 (AAO July 12, 2017) 
6