dismissed EB-1A Case: Photography

MATTER OF M-A-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 15, 2016 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a photographer, seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in the arts. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (tlre Act) § 203(b)(1)(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, Texas Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the Petitioner 
submitted documentation meeting only one initial evidence criterion, when evidence satisfying at 
least three criteria is required. 
The Petitioner appeals the matter to us and submits additional evidence and a brief. He indicates that 
he has satisfied at least three initial evidence criteria and has shown that he has extraordinary ability 
as a photographer. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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, 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-A-
(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 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 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 the 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). 
Satisfaction of at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this 
classification. See Kazarian v. USCJS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) (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. USCJS, 772 F.Supp.2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011); Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010) (holding that the "truth is to be determined not by the 
quantity of evidence alone but by its quality" and that USCIS examines "each piece of evidence for 
relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the conte~t of the totality of 
the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true"). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner, a national of Iran, has stated that he "is a well-known photographer who has won 
many awards both nationally and internationally and is well-established in the field of photography." 
The Director found the Petitioner did not submit the necessary initial evidence because he did not 
demonstrate his receipt of a major, internationally recognized award or provide documentation 
satisfying at least three of the criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)- (x). Upon de novo review, 
we agree that the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient initial evidence. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Documentation of the individual's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The Director found that, although the Petitioner showed he received recognition at photography 
competitions, he did demonstrate he received nationally or internationally recognized awards for 
excellence in his field of endeavor. On appeal, the Petitioner notes that he submitted documentation 
that he was '' in the 
The material provided includes a letter from a" 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-A-
confirming the Petitioner won the award. The Petitioner states that this competition 
is "the highest event in the field of photography of Iran," however, he provided no further 
information to corroborate this characterization. Statements made without supporting 
documentation are of limited probative value and are not sufficient for purposes of meeting the 
burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r 1998) 
(citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l Comm'r 1972)). Without 
more, the Petitioner has not established that he received nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards. He did not, for example, provide evidence regarding the reputation or renown of 
either the competitions or the awards he received. As a result, the Petitioner did not give sufficient 
evidence to satisfy this criterion. · 
Documentation of the individual's membership in associations in the field for which 
classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by 
recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
The Petitioner provided a certificate indicating he is a member of the 
A letter from the Chairman of the Board of Directors states: 
[The] society accepts its members through a complex process and the membership of 
the individuals shall be examined by a committee selected from the Members of the 
Board of Directors and their membership shall be declared after observation of the 
applicants' works and investigation of their artistic & cultural records, number of 
their awards and their creativity. 
The Director found this explanation insufficient to show that the organization requires outstanding 
achievements of its members. On appeal, the Petitioner states that this letter satisfies the criterion 
because it refers to "a complex process" and indicates they "will only accept members who have [a] 
significant body of work and number of awards." 
Despite the letter's reference to a complex process for acquiring membership, neither it nor other 
evidence in the record provides additional details regarding this process. Although the letter 
indicates that the selection committee considers applicants' works and awards, it does not show that 
outstanding achievements are required. The Petitioner has not provided sufficient information 
regarding the criteria used to evaluate an individual's body of work or the degree of selectivity used 
in considering an individual's accomplishments. He has therefore not shown that membership 
requires outstanding achievements. In addition, the letter states that membership is determined by 
the Board of Directors, but details are not provided regarding those individuals' qualifications. As a 
result, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that prospective members' achievements are evaluated by 
national or international experts in the field. 
1 The Petitioner submitted a document entitled " 
by the 
3 
issued at the in the 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-A-
The Petitioner also provided documentation showing his membership in the 
The record does not contain details, however, regarding the 
requirements for membership in that organization. As a result, the evidence provided does not 
satisfy this criterion. 
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the individual'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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner notes that his photographs and their accompanymg commentary are 
published in a photography quarterly. The Petitioner provided copies of the pages related to his 
work, which contain the title, date, and author of the material. As the entry focuses on the 
Petitioner's photography, it is sufficiently about him and his work in the field. As a photography 
quarterly, is a professional publication. For these reasons, the Petitioner has satisfied this 
criterion. 
Evidence of the individual'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. 
The Director noted that the Petitioner provided a letter informing him of his appointment to be a 
member of the jury for in the field of photography. The 
Director concluded, however, that this document did not satisfy the criterion because it does not 
indicate that the Petitioner actually served as a judge. Upon reviewing the record, we note that 
neither the letter nor any other materials contain information regarding the event or the Petitioner's 
involvement in it. In addition, while the letter referenced an "attached description of duties" that he 
would be required to perform, the Petitioner did not provide a copy of that attachment. On appeal, 
the Petitioner states: "It is an unusual request to place the burden on [the Petitioner] to show he 
participated in that event." We disagree with this statement. 
The regulations clearly put the burden 
of proof on the Petitioner to demonstrate eligibility for the benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act. 
In addition, this criterion specifically requires evidence of the Petitioner's participation as a judge. 
The Petitioner states that the regulations do not specifically require him to provide transportation 
tickets or video of his presence. We note that petitioners are free to submit any relevant 
documentation to establish eligibility. Without evidence indicating the Petitioner did in fact act as a 
judge, however, he has not met the burden of proof necessary to satisfy this criterion. 
Evidence of the individual's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. · 
The Petitioner did not previously claim this criterion. On appeal, however, he indicates that h~ 
created a new style of photography. He cites evidence showing that the 
registered a postcard of his, and that he had an individual exhibit in m 
of2015 entitled' 
4 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-A-
This criterion requires original contributions of major significance. Although the Petitioner states 
that he created a new style of photography, he does not elaborate further on this contention. Without 
an explanation and supporting evidence, the Petitioner has not shown that he made original 
contributions of major significance. As evidence of his registered postcard, the Petitioner provided a 
notice indicating that he deposited and registered it at the The 
postcard is called ' · and contains "a picture of an outside and a 
inside the in an orange background, in dimensions of 1 Ox 15cm." The Petitioner did not 
provide other information about the work to demonstrate the significance of its registration at the 
Without more, acceptance of an artist's postcard does not show that 
he or she has made original contributions of major significance. 
Similarly, thePetitioner does not explain how his 2015 individual exhibit demonstrates that he has 
made original contributions of major significance in the field. Regardless, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate eligibility at the time of filing. He filed the instant petition on January 6, 2014, a year 
prior to the exhibition. As the event had not yet occurred at the time of filing, it cannot demonstrate 
his eligibility. For these reasons, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to meet this 
criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the individual'swork in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The Director found the Petitioner met this criterion. Upon review, we note that the Petitioner's work 
has been displayed in several artistic exhibitions. As a result, we agree that he has satisfied this 
criterion. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
The Petitioner did not previously claim this criterion. On appeal, however, he indicates that several 
of his photographs have sold or are for sale. As an initial matter, we note that this criterion requires 
evidence of commercial success in the performing arts . The Petitioner is a photographer. Although 
photography is a field within the arts, it is not a performing art. As a result, the material provided by 
the Petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
Furthermore, even if this criterion was not specifically limited to the performing arts, the 
documentation provided does not establish the Petitioner's commercial success. The Petitioner 
provided a certification stating that three of hi$ works were purchased by the 
in 2005. The certification does not list the amounts paid for the pieces. On 
appeal, he also submits certificates dated April 20, 2015, for the purchase of two of his works from 
the The Petitioner -must demonstrate eligibility at the time of filing. The 
Petitioner filed the instant petition on January 6, 2014. As a result, these two certificates were not in 
existence at the time of filing and therefore cannot be used to demonstrate eligibility. Furthermore, 
the invoices show he sold the pieces for a total price of 31,000,000 Iranian Rials, equivalent to 
5 
Matter of M-A-
approximately $1097.09.2 We find the evidence of these sales insufficient to establish his overall 
commercial success. Lastly, the Petitioner provided Internet printouts showing that his photographs 
are currently for sale. Without more, evidence that the Petitioner's photographs are for sale does not 
indicate commercial success. 
B. Summary 
As indicated above, we find that the Petitioner satisfied two initial evidence criteria listed at 8 C.F .R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)- (x). Had the Petitioner satisfied at least three evidentiary categories, the next step 
would be a final merits determination that considers all of the filings in the context of whether or not 
the Petitioner has demonstrated: (1) 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," and (2) that the individual 
"has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her achievements have been 
recognized in the field of expertise." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 
1119-20 (discussing a two-part review where the evidence is first counted and then, if satisfying the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination). Although we 
need not provide the type of final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, a review of the 
record in the aggregate supports a finding that the Petitioner has not established the level of expertise 
required for the classification sought. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not provided the requisite initial evidence to establish extraordinary ability, as 
required by regulation. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each 
considered as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. In visa petition proceedings, it is 
the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the 
Act. Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of M-A-, ID# 17034 (AAO July 15, 2016) 
2 The amount shown in dollars is an estimate used only for purposes of general comparison. The conversion was 
obtained using the estimated historical exchange rate of .00003539 U.S. dollars per Rial. See XE Currency Converter, 
http://www.xe.com/currencyconverter/#converter (last accessed June 29, 2016). 
6