dismissed O-1B Case: Culinary Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF B-S- LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 28,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an executive chef at its Japanese eel 
restaurant. To do so, it seeks to classify him as an 0-1 nonimmigrant, a visa 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)(15)(0)(i). 8 U.S.C. 
~ 1101(a)(15)(0)(i). 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did 
not satisfy, as required. the evidentiary criteria applicable to individuals of extraordinary ability in 
the arts: a significant national or international award, at least three of six possible forms of 
documentation, or comparable evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(A)-(C). In addition, the Director 
found that the submitted consultation letter did not satisfy the requirement for a written advisory 
opinion from a peer group or labor organization. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(D) and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(5)(ii)(A). 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that sufficient evidence was presented attesting to the Beneficiary's 
distinction in the field and, thus, he is eligible for 0-1 classification. 1 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
As relevant here, section 101 (a)( 15)(0)(i) of the Act establishes 0-1 classification for an individual who 
has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which 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 arts'' as ''distinction:· and "distinction" as "a high level of 
1 We decline the Petitioner's request for oral argument. 8 C.F.R. § I 03.3(b). 
.
Matter of B-S- LLC 
achievement in the field of arts evidenced by a degree of skill and recognition substantially above that 
ordinarily encountered to the extent that a person described as prominent is renowned, leading, or well­
known in the field of arts." 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii). 
Next, DHS regulations set forth the evidentiary criteria for establishing a beneficiary's sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of achievements. A petitioner must submit evidence either of 
"significant national or international awards or prizes" such as "an Academy Award, an Emmy, a 
Grammy, or a Director's Guild Award," or of at least three of six listed categories of documents. 
8 C.F .R. § 214.2( o )(3)(iv)(A)-(B). If the petitioner demonstrates that the listed criteria do not readily 
apply to the beneficiary's occupation, it may submit comparable evidence to establish eligibility. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(iv)(C). When a petitioner provides the requisite evidence. we then determine 
whether the record, viewed in its 
totality, shows sustained national or international acclaim such that 
the individual is prominent in the field of endeavor. 
Additionally, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(ii), provides, in pertinent part that all petitions tor 
0 classification must be accompanied by: 
(B) Copies of any written contracts between the petitioner and the alien beneficiary or, 
if there is no written contract, a summary of the terms of the oral agreement under 
which the alien will be employed; 
(C) An explanation of the nature of the events or activities, the beginning and ending 
dates for the events or activities, and a copy of any itinerary tor the events or 
activities: and 
(D) A written advisory opinion(s) from the appropriate consulting entity or entities. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Introduction 
The record indicates that the petitioning company intends to open a Japanese eel (unagi) restaurant 
in and seeks to temporarily hire the Beneficiary, who it claims 
is the best eel chef in Japan, as its executive chef at a monthly salary $15.000. 2 The evidence shows 
that since June 1, 2016, the Beneficiary has been employed as Head Chef of the 
(also referred to in the record as . a Japanese eel 
restaurant in the district of Japan. 
1 
We note that the evidence contains discrepancies regarding the dates of the Beneficiary's intended employment. The 
petition indicates that he will be employed for II months, while the contract between the parties indicates a 6-month 
period of employment. The Petitioner must resolve any discrepancies in the record with independent, objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. Afatter ofHo, 19 J&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). The Petitioner's evidence does not 
resolve this discrepancy. 
2 
.
Matter l?[ B-S- LLC 
B. The Beneficiary's Eligibility under the Evidentiary Criteria 
Absent evidence of a significant national or international award or prize like the Academy Award, the 
Petitioner seeks to demonstrate the Beneficiary's sustained acclaim and recognition of achievements 
through evidence corresponding to the six regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R § 214 .2(o)(3)(iv)(B). The 
Director determined that the Petitioner did not satisfy any of the evidentiary criteria. The Petitioner 
does not specifically address the regulatory criteria on appeal. In an accompanying letter, however. 
the Beneficiary discusses evidence and achievements relating to four criteria. As discussed below. 
we tind that the exhibits satisfy only one of the evidentiary criteria, 8 C.F.R § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(8)(6) 
(high salary). 
Evidence that the alien has performed. and tvill perform. services as a lead or 
starring participant in productions or events which have a distinguished reputation 
as evidenced by critical reviews. advertisements. publicit y releases. publications 
contracts . or endorsements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(3 )(iv)(B)( /). 
The Petitioner states that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion based on his role, since June 2016, as 
Head Chef of the In his initial letter in support of the petition, the Petitioner's 
president indicates that he visited the Beneficiary at that restaurant and saw him ··supervising all of 
the other chefs" and preparing to grill eel. It submitted a copy of the restaurant's review in the 2016 
guide, published on the website http:/, and a 20 I 0 
article describing the restaurant's cuisine and atmosphere. The article and 
review , however , do not mention the Beneficiary . The record also contains pictures of the 
Petitioner's president and the Beneficiary together at a location claimed to be the 
Upon review, the evidence submitted does not establish that the Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
The plain language of the regulation requires that the Petitioner identify with specificity the events 
or productions in which the beneficiary performed services in a lead or starring capacity, document 
the distinguished reputation of such events or productions. and provide evidence of the beneficiary's 
role in such events in the form of critical reviews , advertisements , publicity releases , publications , 
contracts , or endorsements. While we acknowledge the distinguished reputation of 
the Petitioner has neither identified , nor documented through submission of the evidence 
prescribed by regulation the Beneficiary ' s lead or starring role in events with a distinguished 
reputation at that establishment. The evidence in the record does not include rev1cws. 
advertisements, publicity releases, or publications that mention the Beneficiary by name. 
In addition, the record does not demonstrate that he will prospectively serve as such a participant. 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner indicated in 0 and 0 Classifications Supplement to Form 1-129 
that his duties will be to "direct the launch of the first of a new type of Japanese restaurant in 
an eel specialty restaurant. " The Petitioner did not offer evidence that would distinguish 
his role as leading or starring within any upcoming events with a distinguished reputation. 
3 
.
Matter of B-S-LLC 
Evidence that the alien has achieved national or international recw~nition fhr 
achievements evidenced by critical revie·ws or other published materials by or about the 
individual in major ne.,v5,papers, trade journals. magazines. or other publications. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(2). 
The Petitioner provided published materials about published in the 2016 
guide on the website http:// and in 2010 in the 
The submitted evidence does not satisfy this criterion. The plain language of the 
criterion requires submission of published materials by or about the Beneficiary in major 
newspapers, trade journals, magazines or other publications. The evidence submitted does not satisfy 
this criterion because it is not about the Beneficiary. 
Evidence that the alien has performed and will perform. in a lead starring. or critical 
role for organizations and establishments thai have a distinguished reputation 
evidenced by articles in newspapers. trade journals. publications. or testimonials. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(3). 
The Petitioner's evidence showing that the Beneficiary has worked as the Head Chef of 
establishes that he has held a lead or critical role for an organization ·with a distinguished 
reputation. In addition, his proposed employment as Executive Chef satisfies the requirement that he 
will be performing in a lead role for the petitioning organization. HO\vever, the Petitioner has not 
specifically claimed or provided the required evidence to establish that its organization has a 
distinguished reputation by the submission of evidence in the form of published articles or 
testimonials in support of this criterion. While it has submitted testimonial evidence, the letters do 
not mention the Petitioner and thus do not establish its distinguished reputation. 
Evidence that the alien has received sign{ficant recognition for achievements fi'mn 
organizations, critics. government agencies. or other recognized experts in the field 
in ·which the alien is engaged. Such testimonials must he in a fhrm H'hich clearly 
indicates the author's authori(v. expertise. and knowledge of the alien's 
achievements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(5). 
The Petitioner submitted several testimonial letters in support of the petition. We determine that the 
submitted testimonials and other documentary evidence do not satisfy this criterion. of 
the in Japan, a cooking association which operates to "find, 
develop, and introduce superior chefs to restaurants all over Japan,·· describes the Beneficiary as an 
executive chef with over 30 years of experience, distinguished among chefs in Japan as a chef of 
extraordinary skill, who has "mastered grilling eel.'' of a Japanese w·holesale 
eel distribution company, and of the Japanese eel restaurant 
describes the Beneficiary as the best eel specialist in Japan. Further, a consultation letter 
from a owner of m confirms that he ''has 
significant experience ... as a head chef of restaurants specializing in live eel.'' 
4 
.
Matter of B-S- LLC 
The submitted letters do not satisfy the regulatory standard, which states that aflidavits from experts 
"'shall specifically describe the alien·s recognition and ability or achievement in tllctual terms and s et 
forth the expertise of tbe affiant and the manner in which the affiant acquired such information.'· 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(2)(iii)(B). The Petitioner has not shown that the authors of the letters are 
recognized experts in the culinary field. Although they praise the Beneficiary's culinary skills, none of 
these individuals establish their credentials as recognized experts in that field. In addition, they do not 
explain the manner in which they acquired their information regarding his skills. 
Without further information and evidence, the above-referenced letters are not sufficient to demonstrate 
that the Beneficiary's achievements have received significant recognition. U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements 
submitted 
as expert testimony. See Matter o.l Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm ·r. 1988). 
However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding a foreign 
national's eligibility for the benefit sought. In addition, such letters from experts supporting the 
petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility ; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters 
as to whether they support the foreign national ' s eligibility. 
Finally, on appeal the Petitioner argues that the Beneficiary has achieved a level of recognition that is 
possessed by "only by a handful of chefs worldwide,'' as demonstrated by the tact that in 1993 he was 
given a pufferfish (fugu) cooking license, which it claims is only possessed by the most skilled chefs 
due to the fish's highly toxic nature. It provided a copy of the license. but has not corroborated its 
scope and significance in the culinary field. It is the Petitioner's burden to establish that such 
licensure would constitute evidence of"significant recognition for achievements ti·om organizations in 
the field," pursuant to the plain language of the criterion. 3 
Evidence that the alien has either commanded a high salary or will command a high 
salary or other substantial remunerationfor services in relation to others in the field. as 
evidenced by contracts or other reliable evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(6). 
The Petitioner did not submit material relating to the Beneficiary's past salary or remuneration. such 
as letters from former employers, income tax forms, or pay statements . Instead, it presented its 
contract with the Beneficiary and statement in the petition indicating it will pay him a monthly salary 
of $15,000 , equivalent to an annual salary of $180,000, for the proffered position of executive cheL 
The Petitioner provided comparative wage data relating to average or median wages of "Chefs and 
Head Cooks," in Metropolitan Division from the Foreign Labor Certification (FLC) Data 
Center's Online Wage Library (www.flcdatacenter.com). shows that the Level 4 Wage is $61,901 per 
year. Therefore, it has established that the Beneficiary will command a high salary in the proflered 
position of executive chef in relation to others in the field. Accordingly , we withdraw the Director's 
unfavorable determination relating to this criterion. 
3 The burden of proof is on the party seeking the benefit. Section 291 of the Act. 
5 
.
Matter of B-S- LLC 
C. Consultation Requirements 
Title 8, Code of Federal Regulations § 214.2( o )(2)(ii)(D) provides that all 0 nonimmigrant petitions 
must be accompanied by a written advisory opinion(s) from the appropriate consulting entity or 
entities from a labor organization. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(5)(ii)(A), consultation with a peer 
group in the area of the individual's ability (which may include a labor organization) or a person or 
person with expertise in the area of the individual's ability, is required in an 0-l petition for an 
individual of extraordinary ability. If the advisory opinion is favorable to the petitioner, it should 
describe the individual's ability and achievements in the field and describe the nature of the duties to 
be performed. The Petitioner attempted to satisfy the written advisory opinion requirement by 
submitting the above-referenced letter from the owner of in 
describes the Beneficiary as the best eel specialist in Japan and confirms 
his previous experience "as a head chef of restaurants specializing in live eel." The letter did not 
describe in any detail the Beneficiary's achievements in the field or the nature of the work to be 
done. Further, the letter is unsigned and does not appear on letterhead , thus it has limited probative 
value. We therefore agree with the Director that the letter is inadequate to satisfy the requirement 
for a written advisory opinion from a peer group or labor organization. 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary is eligible for the 
0-1 visa classification as a foreign national with extraordinary ability in the arts. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Malter olB-S- LLC, ID# 613754 (AAO Sept. 28, 2017)