sustained EB-1A Case: Advertising

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 03 052 50892 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: FFB b 2 $ zoo5 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to • 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
l P L 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 03 052 50892 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, California Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be sustained and the 
petition will be approved. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. tj 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established that he qualifies as an alien of extraordinary ability in his 
field of endeavor. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(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, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry to the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means 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. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
An alien, or any person on behalf of the alien, may file for classification under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act 
as an alien of extraordinary ability in science, the arts, education, business, or athletics. Neither an offer of 
employment nor a labor certification is required for this classification. 
The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has achieved sustained national or 
international acclaim are set forth in CIS regulations at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be 
discussed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that the beneficiary has 
sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as a creative director in the 
field of advertising. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3) presents ten criteria for establishing sustained 
national or international acclaim, and requires that an alien must meet at least three of those criteria unless the 
alien has received a major, internationally recognized award. Review of the evidence of record establishes that 
the petitioner has in fact met three of the necessary criteria. 
Documentation of the alien's receet of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or awards for 
excellence in theJield of endeavor. 
WAC 03 052 50892 
Page 3 
Initially, the petitioner submitted evidence that two advertisements for which he was the creative director won 
n 1998. Specifically, his print advertisement won a gold award and his television advertisement 
won a bronze award. The materials from the press kit indicate that it is the largest and most 
famous advertising awards program in the world, with over 17,000 advertisements submitted from 67 countries. 
In the same year, the petitioner won a bronze lion at the Cannes Lions festival, established in 1954 as a response 
to the International Film Festival staged in Cannes since the late 1940's. The materials for this event assert that 
the festival is a major platform for seeing and exhibiting the best advertising work from around the world. 
More recently, the 200 1 Radio-Mercury Awards recognized one of the petitioner's advertisements with a $5,000 
award. The list of awardees includes the petitioner as one of the creative directors. The materials for the Radio 
Mercury Awards indicate that they have been recognizing radio commercials in the United States since 1992 in 
general, Spanish language, radio station produced, and college categories. The award hierarchy includes a 
$100,000 grand prize and several $5,000 awards. The petitioner's advertisement was the only commercial to 
win the Hispanic category. 
The petitioner also submitted evidence of district or regional awards, recognition in the United States limited to 
advertisers that target the Hispanic community and finalist status in other international competitions. 
The director concluded: 
The evidence does not show that the successful performances and award winnings [sic] events 
are due to the self-petitioner's performances, or that the petitioner is solely responsible for the 
award winning performances, or that the petitioner's participation in those events is an 
indication of the extraordinary ability. 
While this language is peculiar because the petitioner does not "perform," it is also flawed reasoning. The 
Nobel Prize is often awarded to collaborators, Olympic medals are awarded to winning teams, Grammy awards 
are issued to entire bands, and Academy Awards often recognize entire production or design teams. Thus, the 
mere presence of a collaboration does not warrant dismissing a significant award. While we agree that simply 
participating on an award-winning project is not necessarily sufficient to meet this criterion, being credited by 
the award issuing entity demonstrates that the credited individual has won the award, albeit with others. The 
petitioner is credited as an award recipient on the above awards. As such, he may be credited with winning 
these awards despite the collaborative effort involved in making the advertisements. 
As discussed above, both the and Cannes-Lions are international festivals with distinguished 
reputations. While the awards were in 1998, we find that the record reflects that the petitioner has sustained that 
acclaim. Awards from competitions limited to a specific segment of the field, suchas advertisements aimed at 
Hispanics, and finalist status at an international festival in London are not persuasive evidence by themselves. 
They are, however, consistent with continued recognition in the petitioner's field. More significantly, as will be 
discussed below, the evidence relating to the other criteria is also consistent with sustained acclaim. Thus, we 
find that the petitioner meets this criterion. 
Published materials about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, 
relating to the alien's work in the $eld for which classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
WAC 03 052 50892 
Page 4 
The petitioner submitted several newspaper articles and Internet news stories. The director dismissed this 
evidence, implying that published material is normal in the field of advertising and referring to the materials as 
"reviews" and "citations." The petitioner, however, is not in an occupation that tends to generate critical 
reviews or citations from other researchers. Rather, the petitioner is in advertising. The director does not 
explain his conclusion that advertisers are frequently reviewed and cited. 
The director also noted that several of the items submitted are not primarily about the petitioner and some 
appear to constitute press releases. While true, not all of the published material can be dismissed. For example, 
in 2001, Advertising Age featured the petitioner in an article as part of its section "Marketing to Hispanics." 
This article is clearly about the petitioner and represents independent journalist reportage. On appeal, the 
petitioner submits evidence that Advertising Age is delivered to 220,000 advertising, marketing and media 
professionals and is considered a "must-read" for the industry. 
The evidence to meet this criterion would have been stronger if the petitioner had complied with the regulations 
at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iii) and 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3) and submitted certified translations of the articles that 
appear to be about the petitioner posted on www.adlatina.com, a site with 9,000 visitors daily. Nevertheless, we 
find that the evidence is sufficient to meet this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on apanel, as a judge of the work of others in the 
same or an alliedjeld of spec$cation for which classlJication is sought. 
While most of the judging performed by the petitioner has occurred after the date of filing, the petitioner served 
on the 2000 jury for the Cuspide Awards in Puerto Rico. The materials for this 22-year old festival indicate it is 
the most prestigious award program in Puerto Rico, relying on "'creative directors' of great international 
reputation7' to judge the competition. The festival's website currently identifies the petitioner as one of its 
former panelists. 
The director dismissed this evidence, concluding that the petitioner had not established the level or type of 
competition involved and that the judging "appears to have been as one of a number of contemporary and 
successful creative directors/copywriters in the field of advertising." On appeal, the petitioner resubmits the 
materials regarding the Cuspide Awards and additional competitions where the petitioner served on the jury 
after the date of filing.' 
The petitioner has worked in Argentina and California. We find that his participation on the jury for the most 
prestigious advertising competition in Puerto Rico is indicative of his national, if not international, reputation. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that 
have a distinguished reputation. 
The director concluded that while Toyota Motor Sales, USA has a distinguished reputation, "it does not follow 
that the individuals employed by that agency are inherently among the best in their fields simply by virtue of 
their association with that prominent agency." The director then cites a lack of letters from independent 
professionals. 
1 
While the petitioner was requested to serve on the jury for the 2002 Mobius Advertising awards prior to the 
date of filing, the date for the panel was December 10,2002, five days after the date of filing. 
WAC 03 052 50892 
Page 5 
First, we do not find evidence that the petitioner has worked as an employee for Toyota Motor Sales, USA. 
Rather, the petitioner heads the account of Toyota Motor Sales, a client of his employer, Conill Advertising 
Saatchi & Saatchi. Moreover, while we agree with the principle that merely working for an organization with a 
distinguished reputation is insufficient, the director failed to analyze the petitioner's actual role with any of his 
employers. Finally, while letters from independent experts are often useful in placing the evidence in context, 
objective evidence in existence prior to the preparation of the petition is far more persuasive. As such, we do 
not find the lack of independent witness letters problematic. 
Conill includes the petitioner's biography on its website through its "meet the heads" link. It also issued a press 
release posted at www.hispanicad.com when it hired the petitioner. The petitioner also submitted that Saatchi & 
Saatchi, with revenues of $476.5 million, is a subsidiary of the Publicis Groupe, ranked fourth in the nation by 
Advertising Age. The same newspaper, in a story featuring the petitioner, indicated that as Vice President- 
Creative Director of Bromley Communications, the petitioner was "[plresiding over one of the biggest U.S. 
Hispanic creative departments with 17 staffers. 
As we find that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria as discussed above, we need not 
discuss counsel's less persuasive arguments. In review, while not all of the petitioner's evidence carries the 
weight imputed to it by counsel, the petitioner has established that he has been recognized as an alien of 
extraordinary ability who has achieved sustained national acclaim and whose achievements have been 
recognized in his field of expertise. The petitioner has established that he seeks to continue working in the 
same field in the United States. The petitioner has established that his entry into the United States will 
substantially benefit prospectively the United States. Therefore, the petitioner has established eligibility for 
the benefits sought under section 203 of the Act. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the petition is approved.