dismissed O-1B Case: Dance Choreography

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 31, 2025 In Re: 35306840 
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 as a dance choreographer of 
extraordinary ability. To do so, the Petitioner pursues 0-1 nonimmigrant classification, 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 did not 
establish the Beneficiary's satisfaction of the initial evidentiary criteria applicable to individuals of 
extraordinary ability in the arts: nomination for or receipt of a significant national or international 
award, or at least three of six possible forms of documentation. 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, 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 
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." See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii). Next, DHS regulations set forth alternative 
initial evidentiary criteria for establishing a beneficiary's sustained acclaim and the recognition of 
achievements. A petitioner may submit evidence either of nomination for or receipt of "significant 
national or international awards or prizes" such as "an Academy Award, an Emmy, a Grammy, or a 
Director's Guild Award," or at least three of six listed categories of documents. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2( o )(3)(iv)(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 extraordinary ability in the arts. See section 
10l(a)(15)(o)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii), (iv). 
II. ANALYSIS 
In denying the petition, the Director determined the Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary's 
nomination for, or receipt of, significant national or international awards or prizes under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2( o )(3)(iv)(A). The 
Director also concluded the Beneficiary fulfilled only two of six alternative 
initial evidentiary criteria, national or international recognition under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(2) 
and significant recognition for achievements under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(5). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts the Beneficiary's nomination for, or receipt of, significant national or 
international awards or prizes and, in the alternative, that she meets four additional criteria. After 
reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we conclude that the Petitioner does not establish the 
Beneficiary's nomination for, or receipt of, significant national or international awards or that she 
satisfies the requirements of at least three criteria. 
A. Nomination or Receipt of Significant National or International Award or Prize 
As noted above, a petitioner may demonstrate that a beneficiary qualifies as an individual of 
extraordinary ability in the arts through evidence of her nomination for, or receipt of, a significant 
national or international award or prize like the Academy Award, an Emmy, a Grammy, or a Director's 
Guild Award. 8 C.F.R § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(A). On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that it provided 
evidence that the Beneficiary was the "winner of a significant national or international award," because 
she won several awards at the annual modem dance and cheerleading competition I I
I I The Petitioner references previously submitted documentation includin two award 
certificates, showing that the Beneficiary won third place at the 2013 
competition in the adult hip-hop solo female open class and second place at the 2014
I I competition in the category of adult hip-hop duo. 1 The Petitioner also provided several 
articles from the Russian web portal pda.ekskursii.by and on the Russian websites news.sb.by and 
telegraf.news, and it claims they demonstrate that dance festival is "an international event." The 
articles, dated 2013 and 2014, advertise the upcoming competition, 
which they describe as a four-day event organized annually since 2007 by the 
1 The Petitioner previously claimed that the Beneficia also received a si nificant national or international award or nze 
based on her claimed recei t of awards such as the 
and, among others. On 
appeal, the Petitioner claims the Beneficiary's eligibility based on the awards mentioned 
above and does not address the other awards. 
2 
I 
to introduce young people to sports and a healthy lifestyle. The articles indicate it is "one of 
the largest dance competitions in Europe," where "more than 5000 dancers from 12 countries will 
compete in all styles of modem dance and cheerleading," and it includes a dance show, _ 
I with the participation of world stars of modern dance. The Director concluded that the 
documentation submitted is not sufficient to demonstrate that the Beneficiary's awards rise to the level 
of significant national or international prizes or awards. We agree with the Director's determination. 
The aforementioned awards and articles are not sufficient to demonstrate that the 2013 and 2014 
third-place adult hip-hop solo female open class award or second­
place adult hip-hop duo award received by the Beneficiary is a "significant national or international" 
award or prize that rises to the level comparable to an Academy Award, an Emmy, a Grammy, or a 
Director's Guild Award, the examples provided in the regulations. The record contains insufficient 
evidence regarding the purpose of the awards, the application, nominating, or selection process used 
by the issuing body, the eligibility criteria, or that the awards have attracted significant recognition 
beyond the context of the events where they were presented. The winners and nominees of Emmy 
and Grammy awards, for example, receive significant national and international media attention as the 
result of their recognition, and the awards themselves are considered among the highest achievements 
attainable in the performing arts. The Petitioner has not provided evidence that the winners for a 
award receive similar recognition .. 
Without evidence establishing that the Beneficiary's award has garnered national or international 
recognition similar to an Academy Award, an Emmy, a Grammy, or a Director's Guild Award, the 
Petitioner's exhibits do not satisfy the regulation at 8 C.F.R § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(A). 
B. Evidentiary Criteria 
1. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(l) 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(l) requires "[e]vidence that the alien has performed, 
and will perform, services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events which have a 
distinguished reputation as evidenced by critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, 
publications, contracts, or endorsements." This criterion requires evidence of the beneficiary's past 
lead or starring participation in distinguished productions or events, and the beneficiary's prospective 
lead or starring participation in distinguished productions or events.2 
The Director found that the Beneficiary met the past part of this criterion but not its future component. 
As it relates to the Beneficiary's prospective services, the future element of this criterion requires that 
the Beneficiary "will perform" services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events with 
a distinguished reputation. The record includes the Petitioner's deal memo with the Beneficiary which 
indicates that she will serve as the Dance Choreographer of its dance productions, lists the 
responsibilities associated with the Beneficiary's position, and identifies five specific upcoming dance 
events in which she will participate in the World of Dance Championship Series and Starpower 
National Talent Competition. The Petitioner has not established how the Beneficiary's role as 
choreographer for the petitioning dance studio will be performing in a lead or starring role for the 
2 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, M.4(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov.policymanual. 
3 
proposed events. For example, and the record does not demonstrate that the Beneficiary's 
participation in any upcoming events has been featured in promotional materials or highlighted in 
media coverage of the events. In addition, the record does not demonstrate that the future events have 
a distinguished reputation as shown by critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, 
publications, contracts, or endorsements. The Petitioner, therefore, has not established that the 
Beneficiary satisfies the requirements of this evidentiary criterion. 
Finally, as the Director's decision noted, within its response to the Director's request for evidence 
(RFE), the Petitioner submitted an additional letter from ______________ a 
Poland-based cultural foundation that produces and presents theater performances with dance, music, 
and martial arts celebrating the I I The letter anticipates the 
Beneficiary's employment in the role of "lead choreographer" and "lead dancer" in I I 
planned "upcoming American fall tours in 2025 and 2026," and notes that "negotiations with sponsors 
and customers are still underway and specific dates are yet to be finalized." On appeal, the Petitioner 
maintains the letter from l"stating that [the Beneficiary] will serve as a choreographer for 
the organization's future tour in the United States" satisfies he future component of this criterion. 
However, the job offer letter is dated June 2024, after the date the petition was filed in May 2024. The 
Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have been 
satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 3 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary fulfills the future part of this criterion. 
For these reasons, the Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary meets all elements of this 
criterion. 
2. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(3) 
The record supports the Director's determination that the Petitioner has not sufficiently documented 
or explained how the Beneficiary has performed and will perform in a lead, starring, or critical role 
for organizations 
or establishments. Here, the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary performed in 
a lead, starring, or critical role for I I We note that this criterion is separate from the 
previously discussed criterion requiring evidence of the Beneficiary's performance of services as a 
lead or starring participant in a production or event. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(l). 
Accordingly, participating at the requisite level for a production or event is not necessarily the same 
as performing in a qualifying role for an organization or establishment. 
Thus, even though the Director determined that the Petitioner had established the significance of the 
Beneficiary's role in past productions including forl Ithe record does not verify that her 
lead or starring participation in those events constitutes a lead, starring, or critical role for the overall 
entity that produces the artistic productions or events. The submissions do not sufficiently describe 
the duties the Beneficiary performed for the organization in her various roles, and do not establish how 
her position fit within the company's overall hierarchy. Furthermore, the record does not contain the 
required documentary evidence in the form of articles in newspapers, trade journals, publications, or 
3 As the Director further noted, the record does not contain documentation showing that the Petitioner had obtained 
authorization froml to act as an agent in order to file the instant petition on its behalf. See generally 2 USCIS 
Policy Manual, supra, at M.3(C). 
4 
testimonials pertaining to the reputation ofl Inor does it offer evidence documenting the 
manner in which her work has resulted in a measurable level of success for the company. 
In addition, the Petitioner must establish that the Beneficiary will, prospectively, provide services in a 
lead, starring, or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
The petition and the deal memo indicate that the Beneficiary will work for the Petitioner over a three 
year period. The record does not include evidence explaining how the Beneficiary's role as a 
choreographer rises to the level of a lead, starring, or critical role for the petitioning dance studio. The 
Petitioner has not provided information that would elucidate where the Beneficiary's proposed 
position falls in the overall hierarchy of its organization or demonstrate her proposed impact on the 
organization. Further, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that it enjoys 
a distinguished reputation. As previously noted, the plain language of this criterion requires the 
submission of evidence in the form of newspapers, trade journals, publications, or testimonials. 
Finally, as previously stated, the Director's decision noted that within the Petitioner's RFE response, 
it submitted an additional letter from I I for the Beneficiary's employment in the role of 
"lead choreographer" and "lead dancer" in planned "upcoming American fall tours in 2025 and 2026," 
for which "negotiations with sponsors and customers are still underway and specific dates are yet to 
be finalized." However, as previously discussed, the job offer letter is dated June 2024, after the date 
the petition was filed in May 2024. The Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for 
the immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through 
adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(1 ). In light of the above, the Petitioner has not established that 
the Beneficiary satisfies the requirements of this evidentiary criterion. 
3. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(4) 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(4) requires "[e]vidence that the alien has a record of 
major commercial or critically acclaimed successes as evidenced by such indicators as title, rating, 
standing in the field, box office receipts, motion pictures or television ratings, or other occupational 
achievements reported in trade journals, major newspapers, or other publications." 4 The publications 
may include print or online publications or transcripts of radio or video coverage. 5 
The Director determined that the record did not include documentation relevant to this evidentiary 
criterion. On appeal, the Petitioner does not specifically challenge this determination or point to 
indicators of the Beneficiary's record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes. As 
evidence for this criterion, the Petitioner refers to documentation it submitted within its RFE response, 
specifically, "articles published in 4 glossy magazines" which it claims, "demonstrate a record of 
critically acclaimed successes." The Petitioner offered interviews dated 2023 with the Beneficiary in 
the Russian print publications Beautiful, New Look, and Antenna-Telesem, in which she provides her 
background and experience as a dancer, dance teacher, and choreographer; advice for aspiring dancers; 
her teaching and choreography methodology; and a step-by-step description of the basic movements 
of hip hop. This evidence does not demonstrate the Beneficiary's record of major commercial or 
critically acclaimed successes, nor does the record contain other documentation satisfying the plain 
language requirements of this criterion. The Petitioner has not established, therefore, that the 
4 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at M.4(D)(2). 
5 Id. 
5 
Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
4. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(6) 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(6) requires "[e]vidence that the alien has either 
commanded a high salary or will command a high salary or other substantial remuneration for services 
in relation to others in the field, as evidenced by contracts or other reliable evidence." The Director 
determined that the Petitioner had not demonstrated 
the Beneficiary's high salary in relation to others in 
the field. To demonstrate eligibility for this criterion, the petitioner should provide appropriate evidence 
establishing that the beneficiary's past or future compensation is or will be high relative to others working 
in the field. 6 
At initial filing, as evidence of the Beneficiary's past compensation in Russia, the Petitioner submitted 
copies of the Beneficiary's contracts with the Idance school for a twelve-year period, and 
her contracts with the I ldance center for a seven-year period. In addition, the Petitioner submitted 
salary statistics from spb.hh.rn, gorodrabt.rn, and mojazarplata.rn for the positions of "dance teacher," 
"dance teacher, choreographer" and "dancers and choreographers" showing an average annual salary of 
20,000 to 70,000 rnbles. The Director's RFE requested "pay statements as evidence of the Beneficiary's 
salary" because the aforementioned contracts do not show the Beneficiary's earnings. 
In response, Iandthe Petitioner provided signed salary verification statements from thel 
dance schools. The certificate froml I indicates that the Beneficiary "worked at the 
dance school I I from September 1, 2012, to November 10, 2023 as a choreographer" 
and her "[ a ]verage monthly earnings received for the period from September 1, 2021 to October 31, 
2023 is 120,000 rnbles 00 kopeks." The certificate from the I I states the Beneficiary "worked at 
the [d]ance centerl Ifrom September 1, 2017 to November 8, 2023, as a choreographer" and 
that her "[ a ]verage monthly earnings received for the period from January 1, 2022 to October 31, 
2023[] is 60,000 rnbles 00 kopeks." 
Assuming that the Beneficiary's average monthly salary was as stated in the aforementioned certificates, 
the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary earned a high salary compared to other dance 
choreographers in Russia. The Petitioner does not offer salary statistics or other documentation as bases 
for comparison showing that the Beneficiary commanded a high salary relative to other choreographers. 
Without evidence such as statistical documentation reflecting the salaries of choreographers, the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary has commanded a high salary. The Petitioner does 
not explain how the submitted salary comparisons for the different occupations of "dance teacher," 
"dance teacher, choreographer" or "dancers and choreographers" shows that the Beneficiary commanded 
a high salary as a choreographer. In addition, we note that the above salary and wage resources on which 
the Petitioner relies do not state how many users reported their salaries to make its findings, which limits 
the data's evidentiary value, and do not identify a "high salary" for those different occupations. Thus, the 
Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary has commanded a high salary in relation to others in the field. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary fulfills this criterion. 
6 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at M.4(D)(2). 
6 
III. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner did not establish the 0-1 Beneficiary's satisfaction of a nomination for or 
receipt of a significant national or international award or at least three of six possible forms of 
documentation, we need not provide a totality determination to establish whether the Beneficiary has 
sustained national or international acclaim, has received a high level of achievement, and has been 
recognized as being prominent, renowned, leading, or well-known in the field of arts. See section 
10l(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii) and (iv). 7 Accordingly, we reserve these 
issues. 8 Consequently, the Petitioner has not demonstrated 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. 
7 See generally 2 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at M.4(D). 
8 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (per curiam) (holding that agencies are not required to make "purely 
advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision). 
7