remanded EB-1A Case: Graphics Programming

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 23, 2024 In Re: 32526301 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a video game and digital entertainment company, seeks to permanently employ the 
Beneficiary as a senior staff graphics programmer. It requests his classification under the 
employment-based, first-preference (EB-1) immigrant visa category as a noncitizen with 
"extraordinary ability." See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(1 )(A), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1 l 53(b )( 1 )(A). Successful petitioners in this category must demonstrate that noncitizen beneficiaries 
have received "sustained national or international acclaim" and extensively-documented recognition 
of their achievements in their fields. Section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Beneficiary met two of ten initial evidentiary requirements - one less than needed to obtain a final 
merits determination. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that it also satisfied two additional criteria: 
evidence of the Beneficiary's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards; and 
proof of his original contributions of major significance in his field. The company alternatively argues 
that it has submitted "comparable evidence" to meet these criteria. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 53 7 n.2 (AAO 
2015), we conclude that the company has met the requisite number of initial criteria by submitting 
evidence of the Beneficiary's original contributions of major significance to the video game industry. 
We will therefore withdraw the Director's contrary decision and remand the matter for a final merits 
determination and entry of a new decision consistent with the following analysis. 
I. LAW 
To qualify a beneficiary as a noncitizen with extraordinary ability, a petitioner must demonstrate that 
the beneficiary: 
• Has "extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics;" 
• Seeks to continue work in their field of expertise in the United States; and 
• Through their work, would substantially benefit the country. 
Section 203(b)(l)(A)(i)-(iii) of the Act. 
The term "extraordinary ability" means expertise commensurate with "one of that small percentage 
who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). Evidence must 
demonstrate a noncitizen's receipt of either "a major, international recognized award" or satisfaction 
of at least three of ten lesser evidentiary standards. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i-x). 1 
If a petitioner meets either of the evidentiary criteria above, USCIS must make a final merits 
determination as to whether the record, as a whole, establishes sustained national or international 
acclaim and recognized achievements placing a beneficiary among the small percentage at their field's 
very top. Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2010); see generally 6 USCIS Policy 
Manual F.(2)(B), www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record shows that the Beneficiary, a Canadian native and citizen, has been programming graphics 
for video games for about the past 20 years. The Petitioner states that the Beneficiary's work involves 
creating algorithms and software to transform digital information into visually compelling images. 
His work - known as "graphics rendering programming" or "graphics rendering engineering" -
includes application of intricate lighting and shading techniques and integration of three-dimensional 
models underlying the visual aspects of video games. 
The Petitioner states that graphics rendering programming plays a critical role in a video game's 
overall success, bringing the game creator's vision to life by polishing the visual field that players see 
on their screens. Graphics' degrees of technical and artistic quality determine the extent of players' 
sensory and immersive experiences. 
The Director found that the Petitioner met the following two initial evidentiary requirements: e vidence 
that the Beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished 
reputations; and proof of his commandment of a high salary or other significantly high remuneration 
for services compared to others in the field. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii), (ix). On appeal, the 
Petitioner contends that it also satisfied two additional criteria: evidence of the Beneficiary's receipt 
of lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in his field; and proof of his 
original contributions of major significance in the field. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (v). 
When adjudicating evidentiary criteria, USCIS determines whether "evidence submitted by the 
petitioner objectively meets the parameters of the regulatory description that applies to that type of 
evidence." 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(2)(B)(l). USCIS may not "unilaterally impose novel 
substantive or evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5." Kazarian, 
596 F.3d at 1121. 
1 If an evidentiary standard does not "readily apply" to a beneficiary's occupation, a petitioner may submit "comparable 
evidence" to establish eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4). 
2 
A. Original Contributions of Major Significance 
To meet this criterion, a petitioner must submit "[e]vidence of the [noncitizen]'s original scientific, 
scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field." 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
When adjudicating this requirement, USCIS first determines whether beneficiaries have made original 
contributions in their fields. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(2)(B)(l). If so, the Agency 
then determines whether the original contributions are of major significance in the fields. Id. 
The Petitioner submitted: letters from former supervisors and co-workers of the Beneficiary and a 
U.S. professor of visual communication design; video game descriptions; and published articles about 
video games. The Director acknowledged the Beneficiary's "many original contributions" to specific 
video games. But the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary's 
original contributions had major significance in the video game industry. 
The letters that the Petitioner provided, however, sufficiently show that the Beneficiary's 
programming innovations in specific video games significantly influenced the industry as a whole. 
The record shows that the Beneficiary has worked on more than 16 major video game projects. But 
his innovations in a 2005 action role-playing game provide an example of his contributions and their 
influence on the video game industry. In that game, the Beneficiary implemented a novel real-time 
physics-based bone system for animated characters. The visual design professor stated that this 
innovation occurred a year before introduction of the first dedicated processor for hardware­
accelerated physics in video games and several years before the addition of dedicated physics 
processors to video game consoles. The professor stated: 
Thus, for [the Beneficiary] to not only conceive of but design and implement this 
original system in [the game] was a contribution of major significance, as it 
demonstrated a run-time physics modeling system that can run smoothly on existing 
consoles without the need for dedicated hardware, necessarily influencing the trajectory 
of other developers' own design decisions due to the prominence of [the Beneficiary's 
then employer] in the industry. 
The letters state that, in the same game, the Beneficiary developed a camera system called "continuous 
collision detection" that allowed an in-game camera to "smoothly traverse and collide the virtual 
space" without jarring or sudden jumps when obstacles appeared. The professor stated that the 
Beneficiary "played a significant early role in demonstrating and popularizing this technology, which 
has since become standard in the videogame industry and is now widely implemented as a default 
functionality in ... popular videogame engines." 
Further, in the same 2005 game, the Beneficiary helped create a streaming system that allowed the 
game to load areas into memory based on a player's location or potential location and permitting the 
game to unload all unneeded areas. The professor stated: 
This process of "asset streaming," as it is now known, is widely utilized today in the 
video game industry but was a rarity at the time [the Beneficiary] contributed to [the 
3 
game]'s development, having only emerged around the millennium with the advent of 
home videogame consoles capable of 3D graphics .... [The Beneficiary] contributed 
impactfully to the adoption of in-game data streaming in 3D graphics rendering, a 
major trend which has facilitated the industry's focus on open-world (a.k.a. sandbox) 
video games ... and driven considerable innovation in the production of photorealistic 
graphics in the videogame industry. 
Thus, the Petitioner has submitted independent, objective evidence that the Beneficiary's original 
contributions have had major significance in the video game industry. We will therefore withdraw the 
Director's contrary finding. 
B. Remaining Arguments 
The Petitioner has met the required number of initial evidentiary criteria. Thus, we need not consider 
the company's remaining arguments regarding the Beneficiary's purported receipt of nationally or 
internationally recognized awards for excellence in his field or other comparable evidence. See INS 
v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies need not make "purely advisory 
findings" on issues unnecessary to their ultimate decisions); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 
516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal if an applicant did not otherwise 
meet their burden of proof). 
As the Petitioner has met at least three initial evidentiary criteria, USCIS must now conduct a final 
merits determination. See Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20; 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(2)(B). Rather 
than make this determination in the first instance, we will remand the matter. 
On remand, the Director must determine whether the Beneficiary has sustained national or 
international acclaim and recognized achievements in his field identifying him as one of that small 
percentage who have risen to the field's very top. See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(2)(B)(2). The 
Director should consider any potentially relevant evidence, even if it does not fit a regulatory criterion 
or was not presented as comparable evidence. Id. The petition's approval or denial should stem from 
the evidence's type and quality. Id. 
III. CONCLUSION 
By submitting proof that the Beneficiary made original contributions of major significance in the video 
game industry, the Petitioner met the requisite third initial evidentiary criteria. 
ORDER: The Director's decision is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for entry of a new 
decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
4