dismissed O-1A Case: Dance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 15, 2024 In Re: 31544920 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Extraordinary Ability- 0) 
The Petitioner, a dance studio, seeks to classify the Beneficiary, a dance instructor, as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. This 0-1 nonimmigrant visa classification is available to individuals 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)(15)(O)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(O)(i) . 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner had not 
established the Beneficiary's satisfaction of the initial evidentiary criteria applicable to individuals of 
extraordinary ability in athletics: either receipt of a major, internationally recognized award or at least 
three of eight possible forms of documentation. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0 )(3)(iii)(A)-(B). 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 dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
As relevant here, section 101(a)(l5)(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 . A petitioner may 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). 
TI. ANALYSIS 
Because the Petitioner did not indicate or establish the Beneficiary has received a major, 
internationally recognized award, it must demonstrate the Beneficiary satisfies at least three of the 
alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(l)-(8). The Director determined the 
Beneficiary fulfilled only two criteria, published material under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(B)(iii)(3) and 
judging under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(B)(iii)( 4). We do not concur with the Director's finding relating 
to the judging criterion, discussed below. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary satisfies 
four additional criteria. 1 After reviewing all of the submitted evidence, the record does not reflect that 
the Beneficiary meets the requirements of at least three criteria. 
Evidence ofthe alien's participation on a panel, or individually, as a judge ofthe work 
of others in the same or in an allied field of specialization to that for which 
class[fication is sought. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(4). 
As noted, the Director determined that the Petitioner established the Beneficiary's eligibility for this 
criterion. This regulatory criterion requires a petitioner to show that the beneficiary has acted as a 
judge of the work of others in the same or in an allied field of specialization. 2 For the reasons outlined 
below, a review of the record does not reflect that the Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary 
evidence demonstrating that the Beneficiary meets this criterion, and the Director's determination on 
this issue will be withdrawn. 
The Petitioner did not initially claim the Beneficiary's eligibility for this criterion. In response to the 
Director's request for evidence, it provided copies of two cards indicating that the Beneficiary was 
registered in Italy as an "International Adjudicator Qualified in Ballroom (Standard) & Latin" by the 
World Dance Council in 2019 and 2020. In addition, the Petitioner submitted a screenshot from 
Federdanza.it, indicating that in 2023 the Beneficiary renewed his registration in Italy with the Italian 
DanceSport Federation with a card type of "Extraordinary technician and judge;" a register type of 
"Technician;" a qualification of "Federal Master;" and specialties of Latin American, Standard, and 
Disco dances. While these registration items indicate that the Beneficiary holds a judging credential 
1 We consider any previous eligibility claims not raised on appeal to be waived. See. e.g.. Matter of O-R-E-, 28 I&N Dec. 
330,336 n.5 (BIA 2021) (citing Matter ofR-A-M-, 25 I&N Dec. 657,658 n.2 (BIA 2012)). 
2 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, M.4(C)(2)(appendix), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
2 
or qualification, they are insufficient to establish that he participated as a judge of the work of others 
at any specific event or competition. 
Further, the Petitioner asserted that the Beneficiary participated as an adjudicator for the 2020 I _
I I competition. It provided materials including a promotional flyer for that competition 
containing a photograph of the Beneficiary; an undated photograph of a group of persons in front of a 
backdrop that states with a handwritten notation indicating it 
is a "Photo of [the Beneficiary] with all adjudicators;" and a screenshot from of the 
adjudicators list for the 2023 I I that does not mention the Beneficiary's name. This 
additional documentation does not identify any specific competitions in which the Beneficiary 
participated as a judge. 
Here, the Petitioner has relied solely on the evidence discussed above, and did not submit 
corroborating evidence, such as the Beneficiary's event-specific judging credentials, or official records 
from one or more events in which it claims he served as a judge, to show that he actually participated 
as a judge for dance competitions. Because the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary 
fulfills the regulatory requirements, we withdraw the findings of the Director for this criterion. 
Evidence ofthe alien's original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions 
of major significance in the field. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(5). 
Analysis under this criterion focuses on whether the beneficiary's original work constitutes major, 
significant contributions to the field. 3 The Petitioner argues the Beneficiary's eligibility for this 
criterion based on his involvement as the director and choreographer, with his spouse, of the musical 
showI I produced by their dance school, T-B-D-, and performed at the I I in 
I I Italy in I I 2019. The Petitioner submitted a promotional poster, a flyer, and a 
program of the performance which indicates it included characters from the movies of director Tim 
Burton and performances by the Beneficiary, his spouse, students of their dance studio, and an 
elementary school choir. 
In addition, the record contains two articles that discuss upcoming events inl Iduring the 2019 
Christmas season; the articles include an almost identical uncaptioned photograph of the Beneficiary 
and several other persons. 4 An article from the Italian print publication La Nazione mentions by name 
some of the "many students of [T-B-D-] association" appearing in I I the next day at the 
I I and states that the show had "its premiere at thel I 
Another article from Gazzettadellaspezia.it provides that the show "was presented this morning at the 
civic building" and will be presented "next Saturday" at the These advertisements 
of the upcoming performance ofl are not sufficient to meet the criterion because they do 
not contain adequate information or documentation to demonstrate how the show already constitutes 
a contribution of major significance in the dance field. 
3 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at M.4(C)(2)(appendix). 
4 The record before us does not contain a full English translation of an additional article in the Italian language published 
by the online publication Cittadellaspezia.com. Any document in a foreign language must be accompanied by a full 
English language translation. 8 C.F .R. § 103.2(b )(3 ). The translator must certify that the English language translation is 
complete and accurate, and that the translator is competent to translate from the foreign language into English. Id. 
3 
Further, the Petitioner provided an undated recommendation letter from choreographer L-S-, whose 
resume indicates he has worked with many famous entertainers including Beyonce, Michael Jackson, 
and Diana Ross. We note that the letter from L-S- is not on letterhead and does not include an address, 
a telephone number, or any other information through which he can be contacted, thus reducing its 
probative value. L-S- states he and the Beneficiary met "in Italy where we worked for a dance gala 
celebrating all forms of Dance from Ballroom to Ballet" and "we have done dance camps, workshops, 
and various events together." He also provides that from his collaboration with the Beneficiary he 
"learned a deep appreciation for ballroom." Here, his letter reflects how he values his collaborations 
with the Beneficiary, but he does not explain what the Beneficiary has contributed to the field and how 
those contributions are considered to be of major significance in the field. For instance, the letter does 
not provide specific examples of how the Beneficiary's original work has substantially impacted the 
dance field, has significantly influenced the work of other dancers or dance instructors in the field, or 
otherwise equates to original contributions of "major significance" in the field. 
For the reasons discussed above, considered both individually and collectively, the Petitioner has not 
shown that the Beneficiary has made original contributions of major significance in the field. 
Evidence that the alien has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for 
organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(7). 
To show a critical role, the evidence should establish that the beneficiary has contributed in a way that 
is of significant importance to the organization or establishment's activities. 5 To show an essential 
role, the evidence should establish that the beneficiary's role is ( or was) integral to the entity. 6 For a 
supporting role to be considered critical or essential, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
considers other factors, such as whether the beneficiary's performance in the role is (or was) integral 
or important to the organization or establishment's goals or activities, especially in relation to others 
in similar positions within the organization. 7 It is not the title of the beneficiary's role, but rather the 
beneficiary's duties and performance in the role that determines whether the role is ( or was) critical or 
essential. 8 The Petitioner argues that the Beneficiary has been employed in a critical or essential 
capacity for the I land the T-V-L- dance training camp. 
Regarding the an article from Gazzetta.it 9 provides that in 2015 the 
Beneficiary and his spouse gave a dance performance at the two-day charity sport event produced by 
the I I for spinal cord injury research. Further, the Petitioner urges 
that the Beneficiary's role in the musical showl lsatisfies this criterion. The plain language 
of the regulation requires"[ e ]vidence that the alien has been employed in a critical or essential capacity 
for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation." (emphasis added). The 
Petitioner has not demonstrated how either a charity sport event or a show equates to an "organization" 
or "establishment," and how the Beneficiary's role as a dancer in a charity sport event or a 
5 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at M.4(C)(2)(appendix). 
6 Id. 
7 Id. 
8 Id. 
9 The record before us does not contain, as required, a full English translation of an additional article in the Italian language 
published on the website Automotornews.it. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). 
4 
director/choreographer in a show rises to the level of a critical or essential role for the production 
company of the charity sport event/show. 
Regarding the T-V-L- dance training camp, the Petitioner submitted a promotional flyer advertising 
the Beneficiary's appearance as a "special guest" at a three-day session in 2019, and promotional 
flyers from subsequent years listing other special guests. The Petitioner, through counsel, asserts in 
its appeal brief that "the promotional material focused on [the Beneficiary] and [his] fellow teachers 
because it is those teachers who draw dancers to sign up for the camps. Without distinguished 
teachers, enrollment in the camp would not be as high and thus the camp might not be successful. 
Therefore, [the Beneficiary] play[ed] a critical role for ... [T-V-L-]." Detailed letters from persons 
with personal knowledge of the significance of the beneficiary's role can be particularly helpful in 
analyzing this criterion. 10 Here, the Petitioner did not provide a detailed letter from an individual with 
personal knowledge of the significance of the Beneficiary's role with T-V-L- dance training camp; 
rather the record contains a 2019 promotional flyer and an appeal brief from counsel. This material is 
insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary has been employed in a critical or essential capacity, 
notwithstanding the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficiary can satisfy this criterion. 
Further, the Petitioner did not establish the distinguished stature of the organizations which have 
employed the Beneficiary. The Petitioner did not submit evidence that demonstrates that either 
T-B-D- dance school or T-V-L- dance training camp enjoys a distinguished reputation. A 2023 
screenshot from the T-V-L- organization's social media page claims it is "[t]he biggest 
_____________________ in southern Italy [] and one of the 
biggest in the World, 5 days dedicated to the dance sport! [] The best teachers in the World." (emphasis 
in original). But the camp's self-promotional materials cannot establish its reputation in the absence 
of other corroborating information in the record that documents the distinguished stature of the 
organization. Similarly, the record does not contain sufficient information which establishes the 
distinguished reputation of T-B-D-, such as, for example, widespread coverage of the dance school in 
major media. 
For the reasons discussed, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has either commanded a high salary or will command a high 
salary or other remuneration for services, evidenced by contracts or other reliable 
evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(8). 
If the petitioner is claiming to meet this criterion, then the burden is on the petitioner to provide 
appropriate evidence establishing that the beneficiary's compensation is high relative to others 
working in similar occupations in the field. 11 Although the Petitioner argues that the Beneficiary's 
future salary as a dance instructor is higher than the median, the Petitioner's comparable data does not 
demonstrate the Beneficiary will command a high salary or other remuneration for services as required 
by this regulatory criterion. 
10 See generally 2 USCJS Policy Manual. supra, at M.4(C)(2)(appendix). 
11 Id. 
5 
The Petitioner initially provided a job offer letter for the position of a dance instructor reflecting an 
annual salary of $60,000, or $28.85 per hour. Further, the Petitioner submitted screenshots from 
onetonline.org showing that "Dancers" in the __________ NY-NJ-PA area earn a 
median wage of $26.08 per hour, with the 75th percentile earning $36.84 and the 90th percentile 
earning $51.01. However, the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary as a dance instructor, while the 
comparable evidence reflects the occupation of dancer. The Petitioner did not show that the 
occupation of a dance instructor is the same as a dancer. Therefore, the Petitioner did not establish 
that the comparative salary data for dancers is relative to the earnings of dance instructors. Even if we 
were to compare his salary to other dancers in the ___________ NY-NJ-PA area, 
the Beneficiary's future salary of $60,000 is a slightly larger salary than the average salary of dancers 
in the data supplied by the Petitioner rather than at the higher end of the spectrum; therefore, the 
Petitioner has not shown the Beneficiary's salary would be a high one, only an above average or medium 
one. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not show that the Beneficiary fulfills this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary satisfied the criteria relating to judging, 
original contributions, employment in a critical or essential capacity, and high salary. Although the 
Petitioner also claims the Beneficiary's eligibility relating to the awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2( o )(3)(iii)(B)( 1), we need not address this ground because the Petitioner cannot fulfill the initial 
evidentiary requirement of at least three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B). We also need 
not provide a totality determination to establish whether the Beneficiary has sustained national or 
international acclaim and is one of the small percentage who has arisen to the very top of the field. 
See section 10l(a)(l5)(O)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii) and (iii). 12 Accordingly, we 
reserve these issues. 13 Consequently, the Petitioner has not established the Beneficiary's eligibility for 
the 0-1 visa classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. 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. 
12 See also 2 USC1S Policy Manual. supra, at M.4(B). 
13 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); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516. n.7 
(BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
6