sustained EB-1A Case: Video Game Development

(b)(6)
DATEDEC 1 7 201�FFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: PETITIONER: 
BENEFICIARY: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
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. § 1153(b )(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. This is a non­
precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy through 
non-precedent decisions. 
Thank yo)/? 
a?-- <?;__. 
(J'-Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition on September 16, 2013. On March 7, 2014, after granting the petitioner's motion to reopen 
and motion to reconsider, the director again denied the petition. The petitioner appealed the decision 
to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on March 25, 2014. The appeal will be sustained and the 
petition will be approved. 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary as an "alien of extraordinary ability " as a creative director 
in the field of video game development, pursuant to section 203(b )(1)(A) of the hnmigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(A). The director determined that the petitioner had not 
established the beneficiary's sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify the 
beneficiary for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the beneficiary meets all but one of the ten criteria under the 
regulations at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), and the beneficiary is at the very top of his field and has 
sustained national or international acclaim. For the reasons discussed below, the petitioner has 
established the beneficiary's eligibility for the exclusive classification sought. 
I. THE LAW 
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 into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
U.S. Citizenship and hnmigration Services (USCIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service 
(INS) have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals 
seeking immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See H.R. 723 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 59 (1990); 
56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). 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.P.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2). 
The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(h)(3) requires that the petitioner demonstrate the beneficiary's 
sustained acclaim and recognition of his or her achievements in the field. Such acclaim must be 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
established either through initial evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally 
recognized award) or through the submission of qualifying evidence under at least three of the ten 
categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
The submission of initial evidence relating to a one-time achievement or at least three criteria, 
however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 
596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) (discussing a two-part review where the evidence is first counted and 
then, if satisfying the required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits 
determination); see also Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011) (affirming USCIS' 
proper application of Kazarian), aff'd, 683 F.3d. 1030 (9th Cir. 2012); Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 
126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013) (finding that USCIS appropriately applied the two-step review); Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010) (holding that the "truth is to be determined not by the 
quantity of evidence alone but by its quality " and that USCIS examines "each piece of evidence for 
relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of 
the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true "). 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), the petitioner, as initial evidence, may present evidence 
of the beneficiary's one-time achievement that is a major, internationally recognized award. In this 
case, the petitioner has not asserted or shown through its evidence that the beneficiary is the recipient 
of a major, internationally recognized award at the level similar to that of the Nobel Prize. As such, as 
initial evidence, the petitioner must present at least three of the ten types of evidence relating to the 
beneficiary under the regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) to meet the basic eligibility 
requirements. In his 2014 decision, the director concluded that the petitioner submitted 
evidence that satisfies the prizes and awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), the published 
material about the beneficiary criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), the judging criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv), and the leading and critical role criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi). 
The record supports the director's conclusion that the petitioner submitted evidence that satisfies at 
least three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). For example, with respect to the 
leading and critical role criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi), the petitioner has submitted reference 
letters showing that the beneficiary, as the Creative Director for 
a art of performs in a leading 
or critical role for In addition, the petitioner has submitted reference letters showing that the 
beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role for a videogame publisher and developer. 
As another example, with respect to the judging criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), the petitioner 
has submitted a letter from former Director of 
stating that the beneficiary "perform[ ed] due diligence and peer 
reviews on key titles in [the company's] slate in order to provide creative oversight, recommenda tions 
and risk mitigation for [the] multimillion dollar investments. " The petitioner has submitted a number 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 4 
of the beneficiary's writings that review, critique and provide recommendations for videogames in 
development. These writings include 
beneficiary also served on an 
panel. 
The 
design judging 
While the record is less persuasive with respect to the director's other favorable findings, 1 the record 
also contains evidence of the beneficiary's high salary, discussed below. See 8 C.P.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(ix). As we further discuss below, other evidence that has probative value includes the 
beneficiary's credited essential work on video games that were award-winning, critically acclaimed, 
and commercially successful. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the petitioner has submitted the requisite initial evidence, we will conduct a final merits 
determination that considers all of the evidence in the context of whether or not the petitioner has 
demonstrated: (1) that the beneficiary enjoys a level of expertise indicating that he is one of a small 
percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor, and (2) that the beneficiary has 
sustained national or international acclaim and that his achievements have been recognized in the field 
of expertise. Section 203(b )(l)(A) of the Act; 8 C.P.R. §§ 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian v. 
USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2010). Based on the evidence in the record and consistent 
with Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1994), the petitioner has made the 
requisite showing. 
The beneficiary's employment in a leading or critical role for a number of well-known companies in 
the videogame industry, including is probative of the beneficiary's eligibility. 
Since 2010, the beneficiary has been the Creative Director at 
According to Director of Production at the the 
beneficiary is "part of the Development Planning Group .. . [that] is a strategic committee responsible 
for shaping and steering all worldwide projects, as well [as] evaluating prospective 
IJartners and third party development teams .. .. " According to Director of Engineering, 
"the company relies heavily on [the beneficiary's] extensive experience to 
help the company bring games to market. His ability to step in and save a project has been 
instrumental to the organization's success. " According to Director of 
Development at the the beneficiary has been "indispensable to [Mr. 
team and to [The] team and Production group in [California] 
heavily rely on [the beneficiary's] experience and judgment in [d]esign to help guide the development 
of products representing $100's of millions revenue. " Mr. further states that the 
beneficiary's "contributions to products have been key to [its] continued success. " The 
evidence in the record establishes that [s an organization that has a distinguished reputation. 
1 The record contains minimal evidence establishing that the beneficiary is the recipient of any award either individually or 
as a member of a winning team, and the petitioner did not submit a certified translation of the foreign language published 
material. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
PageS 
According to "is a creator and publisher of numerous critically 
acclaimed AAA video games including multi-million dollar hits .. .. " According to 
has won "numerous prestigious awards including 
and was the top rated �e of 
According to Vice President of Development at the 
has created "critically acclaimed video games 
across all major gaming consoles." An online article the petitioner submitted supports the above 
letters, stating that sales of boosted overall financials. 
When the beneficiary was at he was its Lead Game Designer and Creative Director and 
contributed to the development of a number of the company's videogames. According to 
the Creative Director for which won eight 
awards in the beneficiary "is one of the most 
talented and creative individuals ha[ s] ever had the pleasure to work with. [The 
beneficiary's] experience, abilities and accomplishments have certainly made him a recognizable 
figure in the gaming industry." According to Studio Manager of 
the beneficiary's "knowledge of game theory and his ability to 
implement ideas both creatively and technically is truly remarkable. Such a force in this industry is 
very rare and places him without a doubt amongst the very best, most talented game developers in the 
world. " Senior Producer at similarly states that 
"without a doubt, [the beneficiary's 1 creative and design skills rank him among the very best in the 
industry." According to Lead Designer at the beneficiary was Lead 
Game Designer and Creative Director and the beneficiary's "knowledge and expertise were key 
contributors to developing [the videogame " states 
that "[a]t [the beneficiary] introduced design principles on adding rhythm and pacing to create 
an engaging experience, methods that were adopted and used by chief editorial teams. " The 
evidence in the record establishes that is an organization that has a distinguished reputation. 
videogarnes received awards in According to 
videogame has been voted 
and was featured on 
2004 annual report lists 
as its top selling game. 
Given the beneficiary's continual performance in a leading or critical role for multiple organizations in 
both Canada and the United States that enjoy a distinguished reputation and widespread notoriety, this 
evidence is consistent with the beneficiary's status as one of the small percentage at the top of his field. 
The petitioner's evidence showing that the beneficiary, at the requests of industry experts, has 
assessed, judged and provided recommendations during the development phase of a number of 
videogames, is also probative of eligibility. For example, according to the beneficiary "has 
consistently provided invaluable feedback, recommendations, and assessments to 
Executives and .. . Studios worldwide that have substantially improved 
and revenue, leading [it] to one [of its] best years with close to a 
products 
in revenue for 20 11." 
states that the beneficiary's "expert understanding of game design theory, game 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 6 
development acumen and experience made him exceptional at evaluating and assessing the works of 
others- of which I relied upon very often." According tc , while at , the 
beneficiary "was often called upon to review the work of his peers at " Supporting these 
statements, the record contains detailed reviews. The beneficiary also served as one of a limited 
number of credited judges in a worldwide design competition. As such, he has judged the work 
of others both internally at his place of employment and externally for a worldwide award competition 
that credited him as one of a limited number of judges. Considered in the aggregate, the beneficiary's 
judging experience is consistent with a finding of the beneficiary's status as one of the small 
percentage at the top of his field. 
In addition, the petitioner submitted probative evidence relating to the beneficiary's salary that is 
consistent with a finding that he is one of a small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. Specifically, the record establishes that the beneficiary has earned well over the 
for wages in his occupation. 
Finally, the beneficiary has been involved in the development of videogames that have had a high level 
of commercial success and are critically acclaimed. The beneficiary is credited as the Creative 
Director for which won the 
according to 
According to videogame for which the beneficiary 
served as the Creative Director, sold copies within the first month of its release. The 
videogame sold units durin fiscal 
period, and received awards, including the 
According to the beneficiary was "responsible for designing the game[']s 
system" and "helped lay the foundation down for the award winning system of the 
indicates that the beneficiary's ' design . . . 
helped lay the foundation for the system that would go on to be one of the most critically 
acclaimed in the industry. " The petitioner also submitted a review of this game posted at 
stating that the game is 
The same review characterizes the 
control and play mechanics as 
The beneficiary's design approaches have been innovative and some have been adopted in the field. 
For example, according to the beneficiary used innovative design approaches during the 
development of the 
_ _ 
including giving the 
ability to fluidly and quickly in a 360 degree radius. " states that this 
design approach "may be commonplace today, but was very unique for its time. " The beneficiary is 
credited as the "Lead Game Designer" and providing "Original Concept " for the videogame 
According to the beneficiary created "an ambitious design 
with a collection of like systems, " including the "implementation of the 
states that the beneficiary's "creative technique was a first in game design at the 
time, and resulted in an exciting and cinematic experience." Similarly, states that the 
beneficiary's "ability to create a seamless experience between multiple 
modes was very inventive for the time, even by today's standards. " states 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
that the beneficiary's work in stood out because of his "unique and 
innovative approach to systems design and tuning whereby he was able to create compelling 
simulations of -gameplay modes that, at the 
time. hadn't been explored before in games." The beneficiary is also credited for "Game Design" in 
the According to when designing 
the beneficiary "demonstrated his ability to innovate in design by creating the first 
of its kind ever adventure game .. .. There were many design concepts introduced in this title 
that were completely new to games at the time. To this day the title stands as a cherished and most 
unique experience by garners in particular. " 
Considered in the aggregate, the petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
beneficiary is one of the small percentage who are at the very top of the field and demonstrates his 
sustained national or international acclaim. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 204.5(h)(2), (3). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate 
that the alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small 
percentage who have risen to the very top of his or her field of endeavor. 
The petitioner has submitted qualifying evidence relating to the beneficiary under at least three of the 
ten evidentiary criteria and has established that the beneficiary has a "level of expertise indicating that 
[he] is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor" and 
"sustained national or international acclaim. " The beneficiary's achievements have been recognized in 
his field of expertise. The petitioner has shown that the beneficiary seeks to continue working in the 
same field in the United States. The petitioner has established that the beneficiary's entry into the 
United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States. Therefore, the petitioner has 
established the beneficiary's eligibility for the benefit sought under section 203 of the Act. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely 
with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act; 8 U.S. C. § 1361. Here, that burden has been met. 
ORDER: The March 7, 2014 decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the 
petition is approved.