remanded EB-1A Case: Jewelry Making

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUNE 14, 2024 InRe : 31422136 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner seeks to classify the Beneficiary 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 petition, concluding the Petitioner did not 
establish that the Beneficiary satisfied at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria. The matter is now 
before us on appeal. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the matter for entry of a new decision consistent 
with the following analysis. 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to individuals with 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, provided that the individual seeks to enter the United States to continue 
work in the area of extraordinary ability, and the individual'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 a beneficiary's 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 they must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that a beneficiary 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 authorship of scholarly articles). 
Where a beneficiary 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). 
Because the Petitioner has not claimed or established the Beneficiary's receipt of a major, 
internationally recognized award, the Beneficiary 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 determined the 
Beneficiary did not fulfill any of them. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains the Beneficiary meets nine 
evidentiary categories. 
Upon review of the record, we agree with the Petitioner that the Beneficiary satisfies the judging 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), the display criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii), and the 
leading or critical role criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 1 The Petitioner has, therefore, overcome 
the basis for denial of the petition through the Beneficiary's fulfillment of three regulatory criteria. 
Nevertheless, granting three of the initial criteria does not suffice to establish eligibility for classification 
as an individual of extraordinary ability. The Director must undertake a final merits determination to 
analyze the Beneficiary's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine if they 
establish that he has sustained national or international acclaim in the field and that he is one of the 
small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) 
of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 
Because the Petitioner has overcome the stated reason for denial, we remand this proceeding so that 
the Director can render a final merits determination. 
ORDER: The Director's decision is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a new 
decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
1 The record includes documentation indicating that the Beneficiary has judged the work of jewelry makers, displayed his 
work at jewelry exhibitions, and performed in a critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation. 
2