dismissed O-1A Case: Business

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 17872747 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : AUG . 12, 2021 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Extraordinary Ability- 0) 
The Petitioner , a media production agency, seeks to classify the Beneficiary , a senior vice president of 
production finance , as a foreign national of extraordinary ability in business. To do so, the Petitioner 
seeks 0-1 nonimmigrant classification, available to foreign nationals who can demonstrate their 
extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have 
been recognized in the field through extensive documentation . See Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(O)(i), 8 U.S .C. § l 101(a)(15)(O)(i). 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
satisfy , as required , the alternative evidentiary criteria applicable to individuals of extraordinary ability 
in business, either a major, internationally recognized award or at least three of eight possible forms 
of documentation . 8 C.F.R . § 214 .2(o)(3)(iii)(A)-(B) . 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary meets at least three criteria. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
As relevant here, section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) of the Act establishes 0-1 classification for an individual who 
has extraordinary ability in the sciences , arts, education, business , or athletics that has been demonstrated 
by sustained national or international acclaim, whose achievements have been recognized in the field 
through extensive documentation, and who seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area 
of extraordinary ability . Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations define "extraordinary 
ability in the field of science, education, business, or athletics" as "a level of expertise indicating that the 
person is one of the small percentage who have arisen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214 .2(o)(3)(ii). 
Next, DHS regulations set forth alternative evidentiary criteria for establishing a beneficiary 's 
sustained acclaim and the recognition of achievements . 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii) . A petitioner must 
submit evidence either of "a major, internationally recognized award, such as a Nobel Prize," or of at 
least three of eight listed categories of documents. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(A)-(B). 
The submission of documents satisfying the initial evidentiary criteria does not, in and of itself, 
establish eligibility for 0-1 classification. See 59 Fed. Reg. 41818, 41820 (Aug. 15, 1994) ("The 
evidence submitted by the petitioner is not the standard for the classification, but merely the 
mechanism to establish whether the standard has been met."). Accordingly, where a petitioner 
provides qualifying evidence satisfying the initial evidentiary criteria, we will determine whether the 
totality of the record and the quality of the evidence shows sustained national or international acclaim 
such that the individual is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor. See 
section 101(a)(15)(o)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii), (iii). 1 
II. ANALYSIS 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that the Beneficiary has received a major, 
internationally recognized award, it must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(])-(8). The Director determined that the Petitioner provided evidence 
relating to three criteria, but that it demonstrated the Beneficiary's eligibility for only one criterion, 
critical or essential capacity at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(7). We will not disturb that finding. The 
Petitioner maintains on appeal that the Beneficiary fulfills two additional alternate criteria, related to 
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements and high salary or other remuneration. 
For the reasons discussed below, we find that the documentation does not meet at least three of the 
initial evidentiary criteria. 
Documentation of the alien 's membership in associations in the field for which 
class[fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or .fields. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(2). 
The Petitioner maintains the Beneficia ibility for this criterion throu h her osition as board 
member and treasurer of the Chamber of Commerc Chapter, Inc. 
I I and her membership in~-------------~· 
2 
In order to satisfy this 
criterion, the Petitioner must show that membership in the association is based on being judged by 
recognized national or international experts as having outstanding achievements in the field for which 
classification is sought. In denying the petition, the Director found that the Petitioner did not submit 
evidence tha~ I requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts. The Director's decision did not address the Petitioner's claim 
regarding the Beneficiary's membership inl I On appeal, the Petitioner has not submitted any 
new evidence related to the Beneficiary's memberships, asserting that the documentation demonstrates 
1 See also Matter of Chawathe, 25 T&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010), in which we held that, "truth is to be determined not 
by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality." 
2 The Petitioner previously claimed that the Beneficiary also meets this criterion based on her membership in Media 
Financial Management as a participant in its Network, Programming, and Streaming committee. On appeal, the Petitioner 
asserts the Beneficiary's eligibility based on her membership in the organizations above and does not address her 
membership in Media Financial Management. 
2 
her eligibility under this criterion. We find that the Petitioner has not shown that the Beneficiary meets 
this criterion. 
With respect to the Beneficiary's membership in thd I, the record contains screenshots from 
the organization's website, stating that "membership inl I means access to our professional 
network and resources to help you meet your professional goals." The Petitioner also provided a letter 
froml I the president ofl I who describes the organization as the point of contact 
for businesses, organizations, and individuals of thel I community in the United 
States, with a goal of encouraging business activity between California andl I He claims that 
the organization's members are comprised of "important" members of the creative and business 
industry, including producers, directors, actors, singers, and business leaders iU I the United 
States, and elsewhere. He confirms that the Beneficiary has been a member orl l since May 
2019, and a board member and treasurer of the organization since October 2019. 
Regarding the requirements for board members of the organization,! I claims that "[i]n 
selecting members for the Board, I make the initial suggestions based on individuals who are leaders 
in their field. Only the individuals at the top of their field are considered." He asserts that "[t]hese 
leaders must have some connection to th~ land/or U.S. business or artistic field and through 
their backgrounds and accomplishments be able to add additional prestige and firm the reputation of 
the organization." Regarding the requirements for a treasurer of the organization, he asserts that, in 
addition to meeting the foregoing criteria for board members, a treasurer ofl I requires 
"detailed financial knowledge and acumen." He further indicates that "[t]he selected board members 
were voted in by all the members present at the annual general meeting" and that the Beneficiary "was 
voted in as Board member and treasurer at the annual general meeting on October 17, 2019 for a two­
year period." 
While we have considered! ts letter, we agree with the Director that his statements are not 
sufficiently detailed to establish that thel I requires prospective members to demonstrate 
"outstanding achievements" as a condition of admission. First, althougtj I indicates that he 
makes "the initial suggestions" of board members, he does not state who is responsible for selecting 
the candidates for membership who are voted upon at the annual meeting, their expertise and 
recognition, and what other factors are considered for selection once an applicant has been suggested 
by him. 
In addition, I I does not sufficiently detail on what basis membership applications are 
evaluated. For example, it is unclear how an ap]licant would demonstrate that he or she is "a leader" 
or "top" in the field. As noted.I _ mentions that he considers factors such as "some 
connection to thel I and/or U.S. business or artistic field and through their backgrounds and 
accomplishments be able to add additional prestige and firm the reputation of the organization." This 
statement is broad and is not accompanied by any supporting evidence regarding the membership 
requirements ofl I such as information from its website regarding membership and the 
application process, or its constitution or bylaws, which may contain information regarding the 
selection criteria and process for becoming a board member or treasurer. Similarly, regarding the 
additional stated requirements for a treasurer, having "detailed financial knowledge and acumen" is 
inherent to treasurers rather than an indication of"outstanding achievements" relative to other working 
treasurers. 
3 
Here, we note the need for corroborating evidence of the membership requirements because the letter 
from the representative ofl I lacks detailed information regarding these requirements and the 
manner in which membership is granted. The record reflects that the Petitioner was afforded the 
opportunity to submit the "requirements and criteria used to accept a person for membership" or any 
other type of relevant evidence in response to a request for evidence prior to the petition's denial. The 
Board of Immigration Appeals (the Board) has stated: "We not only encourage but require the 
introduction of corroborative testimonial and documentary evidence, where available." Matter of S­
A-, 22 I&N Dec. 1328, 1332 (BIA 2000); see also, Matter of Y-B-, 21 I&N Dec. 1136 (BIA 1998) 
(noting that there is a greater need for corroborative evidence when the testimony lacks specificity, 
detail, or credibility). 
Moreover, the Petitioner has not submitted evidence corroborating! l's claims regarding the 
qualifications of the other board members a~ I or their outstanding achievements. The 
Petitioner initially submitted screenshots from the I !website. providing biographical 
information forl I and several board members, including! LI I 
andl I Within its response to the Director 's request for evidence (RFE) it provided 
additional biographical statements for some of those board members. For instance,! ts 
biographical statement from imdb.com indicates he has more than 20 years of experience in talent and 
business management. That of I I from linkedin.com indicates he is a change management 
professional and a university instructor in business administration. 3 While the individual members of 
the board may be highly qualified, as stated previously, the record does not demonstrate thatl I D requires outstanding achievements, as judged by recognized national or international experts, to 
be appointed to its board or the position of treasurer. 
Similarly, the Petitioner has also not established that the Beneficiary 's membership in I l first 
asserted within its RFE response, meets the requirements of this criterion. Information provided from 
the organization's website indicates it operates "to achieve gender equality in film, TV, and digital 
media to create more opportunities for women." The documentation submitted from I I and 
information from its website outlines the following membership levels: 
• Student Member/ $50 
For full time undergraduate and graduate students working toward a degree in media arts: 
Requires 1 letter of recommendation 
• Associates Member/ $85 
For recent graduates and entry-level professionals who have worked in the entertainment 
industry for less than three years: 
Requires 1 letter of recommendation 
• Career Member/ $200: For anyone who has been working in the entertainment industry for 
at least three years. Requires 1 letter of recommendation 
• Executive Member/ $500: 
For industry leaders in film, television, or digital media, with advanced experience as industry 
professionals [applications subject to review by Executive Committee] 
3 Although within its RFE response the Petitioner also provided a biographical statement for songwriter ! I 
from Wikipedia.orf and asse1ed she is ai:=::J board member, that claim is not corroborated by the documentation 
submitted from the.__ __ _. website orL__Js biography. 
4 
• Advocate Member: $1500: 
For industry leaders who are taking their support to the next level. [Acceptance based on Board 
review.] 4 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted a letter from .__ _______ __, development and 
communications coordinator for I J who confirms that the Beneficiary "has been an Executive 
Member with I I since November 25, 2018," and provides that the criteria in selecting an 
Executive Member require review and approval of the application by the Executive Committee of the 
Board of Directors, consideration of "the applicant's advanced experience in the film, television, or 
digital media as an industry professional," experience at "an advanced or executive level," and that 
the applicant "must be the cream of the crop in their field." I l's letter does not detail how 
an applicant would demonstrate that he or she is "the cream of the crop in their field," and we note 
that the above supporting evidence from the I I website regarding membership and the 
application process does not describe this criterion for selection to membership in the organization. 
The Petitioner did not show that the membership requirements for thel I require outstanding 
achievements, as judged by recognized national or international experts. The record reflects that the 
.__ __ _.I focuses on a certain level of experience and the payment of dues, rather than outstanding 
accomplishments and achievements in the field. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that 
possessing the stated entertainment industry experience is indicative of outstanding achievements 
consistent with this regulatory criterion. 
letter rovides that other Executive Members of ~I--~ 
President of and I l the Executive Vice 
President of.__ ________________ ____., the fact that Executive Members include 
top executives of big companies is insufficient to establish that membership in the organization requires 
outstanding achievements in the field of business. 
Further, the Petitioner has not established that recognized national or international experts judge 
membership in the I I As indicated above, the letter from I I reflects that the 
Executive Committee of the Board of Directors reviews and approves the membership application. 
Although the Petitioner submitted articles from www.variey.com and www.thewrap.com reflecting 
biographical information for board member~ I I, 11 I, and 
I l the article from www.thewrap.com indicates that those individuals became board 
members in January 2020. The record also contains the 20201 I Annual Report listing the names 
of the "2020 Board of Directors." This documentation is insufficient to establish the expertise and 
recognition of those individuals judging the Beneficiary for admission in 2018. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary meets this 
criterion. 
4 See https:~~-----~l/become-a-member/, accessed on August 11, 2021. 
5 
III. CONCLUSION 
We find that the Petitioner did demonstrate that the Beneficiary meets the criterion relating to 
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements. Although the Petitioner claims the 
Beneficiary's eligibility for an additional criterion on appeal, relating to high salary at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(8), we need not reach this additional ground. As the Petitioner cannot fulfill the 
initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B), we reserve this 
issue. 5 Consequently, the Petitioner has not established the Beneficiary's eligibility for the 0-1 visa 
classification as an individual of extraordinary. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated 
reasons, with each considered as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24. 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach). 
6