remanded EB-1A Case: Singer

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 13, 2024 In Re: 32821142 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a singer, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. See Immigration 
and National 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 record did not 
establish that the Petitioner meets the initial evidence requirements for this classification, either 
through her receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, or, in the alternative, by satisfying at 
least three of the ten evidentiary criteria set forth in the regulations. The matter is now before us on 
appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
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 I&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)(1 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to nonc1t1zens who: have 
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; seek to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability; and will substantially benefit the United States upon their entry. 
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 may demonstrate 
international recognition of their achievements in the field through a one-time achievement (that is, a 
major, internationally recognized award). Absent such an achievement, a petitioner must provide 
sufficient qualifying documentation demonstrating that they meet at least three of the ten criteria listed 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
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 Amin 
v. Mayorkas, 24 F.4th 383, 394 (5th Cir. 2022); 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). 
Here, because the Petitioner has not indicated or established her receipt of 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 claimed she could satisfy seven of the ten criteria, but the Director 
determined that she met only one, by providing evidence that she has displayed her work at artistic 
exhibitions or showcases. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director applied evidentiary requirements that are not found 
in the plain language of the regulations and disregarded relevant evidence. The Petitioner maintains 
that the evidence demonstrates that she satisfies the criteria related to receipt of nationally recognized 
awards, memberships in associations that require outstanding achievements, published materials in 
major media, judging the work of others, earning a high salary or other significantly high 
remuneration, and commercial successes in the performing arts. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.3(h)(i)-(iv), (ix) 
and (x). 
For the reasons discussed below, we conclude the Petitioner has demonstrated that she meets at least 
two additional criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), and therefore satisfied the initial evidence 
requirements for the requested classification. 
First, to meet the awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), the Petitioner must show that she has 
been the recipient of an award that qualifies as a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize 
or award for excellence in her field of endeavor. The record includes evidence that she received a 
Best Singer Award from the ______________________ in 2021. 
Evidence of her receipt of the award is supported by statements from the awarding entity, information 
regarding the purpose and history of the award, and evidence of media coverage received by the 
Petitioner and other winners of awards from this organization, not all of which was weighed in the 
Director's decision. Considered in its totality, we conclude that the Petitioner met her burden to 
demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that this award qualifies as a nationally recognized 
award for excellence in the Petitioner's field in Bangladesh and meets the plain language of the 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
Further, to meet the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), the Petitioner must provide published 
material about her in professional or major trade publications or other major media. Such evidence 
must include the title, date and author of the material, and any necessary translation. In evaluating 
whether a publication is a professional publication, major trade publication, or other major media, 
relevant factors include the intended audience and the relative circulation, readership, or viewership. 
See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(B)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual (discussing evaluation 
of initial evidence of extraordinary ability under the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x)). 
2 
The Director concluded that, although the Petitioner submitted published newspaper articles about her 
and her work as a singer, she did not submit sufficient evidence to support her claim that the articles 
were published in major media. The Director acknowledged the Petitioner submitted several sources of 
information regarding Bangladeshi daily newspapers but found each source to be inadequate either due 
to a lack of an English translation that was fully compliant with the regulation at 8 C.F .R. § 103.2(b)(3), 
or because the sources ranked publications without providing specific circulation or readership numbers. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a certificate of translation for a document issued by the Government 
of Bangladesh, Directorate of Film and Publications Audit Branch, which lists the circulation figures for 
both Bengali language and English language daily newspapers as of June 2018. 1 In addition, she 
emphasizes that the previously submitted translation was substantially compliant with 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103 .2(b )(3) and notes she also provided other credible rankings of publications based on their relative 
circulation, including an article published by the BBC and a scholarly article about Bangladeshi 
newspapers published in a reputable academic journal. 
The Petitioner has provided relevant and credible evidence in support of her claim that some of the 
submitted articles were published in daily newspapers that qualify as major media in Bangladesh and 
otherwise meet the requirements of the plain language of the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). She 
is not required to demonstrate that every submitted article satisfies the criterion. 
With eligibility established under these two additional criteria, the Petitioner satisfied part one of the 
two-step adjudicative process described in Kazarian and has overcome the sole basis for the denial of 
her petition. Accordingly, we will withdraw the Director's decision. Because the Petitioner has met 
the initial evidence requirements of at least three criteria, it is unnecessary to discuss any additional 
eligibility claims relating to the regulatory provisions at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
However, granting three initial criteria does not suffice to establish eligibility for the classification the 
Petitioner seeks or establish that the record supports the approval of the petition. USCIS must now 
determine whether the record establishes the sustained national or international acclaim and 
recognized achievements sufficient to place the Petitioner among the small percentage at the very top 
of her field. 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. The Director did not reach that finding, and we decline to make the final merits 
determination in the first instance. We will therefore remand the matter. 
On remand, the Director should evaluate the evidence and consider the petition in its entirety to make 
a final merits determination. The final merits determination should weigh the evidence submitted in 
support of all claimed initial evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), any other relevant 
evidence in the record, and the Petitioner's claims and evidence on appeal. 
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 Director emphasized in the decision that the information in this document is outdated and therefore lacks probative 
value. However, the record reflects that the Petitioner submitted newspaper articles about her that were published in 2018. 
3