dismissed EB-1A Case: Stage Acting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
InRe : 12331963 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : DEC . 28, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a stage actor, 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 record did not 
establish that the Petitioner had satisfied at least three of ten initial evidentiary criteria, as required . 
The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
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 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to aliens 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 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 
international 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 criteria 
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) 
( 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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
After graduating from thq_~----,----~ITheatre and Film Institute, the Petitioner has appeared in several 
I I theatrical productions. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
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). The Petitioner claims to have met five criteria, summarized below: 
• (i), Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards; 
• (iii), Published material about the alien in professional or major media; 
• (iv), Participation as a judge of the work of others; 
• (vii), Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases; and 
• (viii), Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments. 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner did not meet any of the evidentiary criteria. On appeal, the 
Petitioner asserts that she meets all five of the previously claimed criteria, and that the Director 
imposed arbitrary or unduly restrictive conditions on those criteria. 
After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we conclude that the Petitioner has met at least three 
criteria, numbered (i), (iii), and (iv). Therefore, rather than discuss the specific requirements of the 
evidentiary criteria, we will evaluate the totality of the evidence in the context of the final merits 
determination below. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the Petitioner submitted the reqms1te initial evidence, we will evaluate whether she has 
demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, her sustained national or international acclaim and 
2 
that she is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and that her 
achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. In a final merits 
determination, we analyze a petitioner's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to 
determine if their successes are sufficient to demonstrate that they have extraordinary ability in the 
field of endeavor. 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. 1 In this matter, we determine that the Petitioner has not shown her 
eligibility. 
The record shows that the Petitioner has had some degree of success in the I I theater 
community, through which she has satisfied the letter of at least three of the regulatol criteria. The 
Petitioner, however, has not demonstrated that a successful career in theater inl translates into 
the national or international acclaim that the statute and regulations require. 
The Petitioner has won awards from the Association of Latin Entertainment Critics._! ____ _,I and the 
Hispanic Organization of Latin Actors, and she participated, both as an artist and as a juf ge, at the Festival 
I l" described by its founder as "the showcase for Latino Actors in f' The 
Petitioner has not established that these achievements place her among the small percentage at the very 
top of her field. Awards, festivals, and theater companies occupy many different levels within the field 
of live theater, and therefore information about these things carries little weight in the absence of wider 
context. Eligibility rests upon objective comparison between the Petitioner's accomplishments and those 
of others in the field, and the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence in this regard. 
The statute demands national or international acclaim; the regulations require individuals to have risen 
to the very top of the field of endeavor. The record, as a whole, provides a limited basis for assessing 
the Petitioner's achievements and recognition in the required national or international context. For 
instance, the artistic directors of two I I theater companies assert that the Petitioner is a critical 
member of their theater companies. Both companies have mounted award-winning productions, but the 
record does not provide an adequate basis of comparison to show that the number or prestige of these 
awards sets them apart from, and above, other theater companies. Likewise, the Petitioner has established 
local media coverage of the two theater groups, but has not established that the nature or extent of that 
coverage distinguishes them from other groups. 
The Petitioner has established major media coverage in her own right, but this coverage amounts to 
articles in Mexican newspapers discussing the Petitioner's work in the United States. The Petitioner has 
shown neither that she was a prominent actress in Mexico, nor that her work in the United States has 
earned significant coverage in major U.S. media. The articles in the record emphasize that the Petitioner 
is from Mexico, the implication being that she warrants coverage in Mexico by virtue of being a Mexican 
who has enjoyed some degree of attention inl I The Petitioner has not shown that, overall, her 
media coverage has been commensurate with that of top U.S. stage actors. 
1 See also USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form 1-140 
Petitions; Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADI 1-14 4 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/legal-resources/policy-memoranda (stating that USCIS officers should then evaluate the evidence 
together when considering the petition in its entirety to determine if the petitioner has established, by a preponderance of 
the evidence, the required high level of expertise for the immigrant classification). 
3 
The Petitioner has established a presence in the I I theatrical community, but the evidence 
submitted does not rise to the level of establishing sustained national or international acclaim as an actor 
at the very top of her field. 
III. CONCLUSION 
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. U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services 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 she has earned sustained national or 
international acclaim, 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 is one of the small 
percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(l)(A) of the Act 
and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). A viable career in a competitive field of endeavor is not commensurate 
with sustained acclaim. 
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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4