dismissed O-1B Case: Historic Restoration

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., NW, Rm. 3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PETITION: 
 Petition for Nonimmigrant worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1 101(a)(15)(0)(i) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
ed your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Administrative Appeals Office ' 
EAC 04 204 50274 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service Center, and is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is an old house restoration designer. The beneficiary is restorer. The petitioner seeks 0-1 
classification of the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts under section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 8 1101(a)(15)(0)(i), in order to employ her as an 
historia; and designer for an unspecified period of time at a wage of $30 per hour. 
The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary satisfies the 
standards for classification as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts. 
On appeal, counsel submits a brief and additional documentation. 
Section 10l(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act provides classification to a qualified alien 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. 
The issue to be addressed in ths proceeding is whether the petitioner has established that the beneficiary qualifies 
as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts as defined by the statute and the regulations. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(0)(3)(ii) defines, in pertinent part: 
Arts includes any field of creative activity or endeavor such as, but not limited to, fine arts, visual 
arts, culinary arts, and performing arts. 
Extraordinary ability in the field of arts means distinction. Distinction means a high level of 
achievement in the arts evidenced by a degree of slull 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. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(0)(3)(iv) states that in order to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability in the 
arts, the alien must be recognized as being prominent in his or her field of endeavor as demonstrated by the 
following: 
(A) Evidence that the alien has been nominated for, or has been the recipient of, significant 
national or international awards or prizes in the particular field such as an Academy Award, an 
Emrny, a Grarnrny, or a Director's Guild Award; or 
(B) At least three of the following forms of documentation: 
(1) Evidence 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; 
EAC 04 204 50274 
Page 3 
(2) Evidence that the alien has achieved national or international recognition for 
achievements evidenced by critical reviews or other published materials by or about the 
individual in major newspapers, trade journals, magazines, or other publications; 
(3) Evidence that the alien has performed, and will perform, in a lead, starring, or critical 
role for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation evidenced by 
articles in newspapers, trade journals, publications, or testimonials; 
(4) Evidence 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 picture or television ratings, and other occupational achievements reported 
in trade journals, major newspapers, or other publications; 
(5) Evidence that the alien has received significant recognition for achievements from 
organizations, critics, governmental agencies, or other recognized experts in the field in 
which the alien is engaged. Such testimonials must be in a form which clearly indicates the 
author's authority, expertise, and knowledge of the alien's achievements; or 
(6) Evidence 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 beneficiary is a resident and native of England and has earned a bachelor's of arts degree in restoration and 
decorative studies. According to the Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonirnrnigrant Worker, the beneficiary currently 
resides in Leicester, England. 
The petitioner does not allege, and the evidence does not establish, that the beneficiary has been nominated for, or 
been the recipient of, any significant national or international awards or prizes in her field of endeavor. The 
petitioner also submitted no evidence that the beneficiary meets the first two criteria. The petitioner did not 
initially indicate the specific criteria that it believes the beneficiary meets. On appeal, counsel stated that the 
petitioner was submitting evidence to establish that the beneficiary met the last three criteria. 
Evidence that the alien has performed, and will perfom, in a lead, starring, or critical role for organizations and 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation evidenced by articles in newspapers, trade journals, 
publications, or testimonials. 
The director determined that the petitioner had submitted sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary 
meets this criterion. We withdraw this determination by the director. 
The petitioner stated that the beneficiary would serve as an advisor and historian. The petitioner failed to 
establish that this position is a lead or critical role for the petitioning organization. The record contains a copy 
of a newspaper article indicating that the owner of the petitioning organization had served two and one-half 
years on the Nantucket Massachusetts Historic Districts Commission. Another article states that the 
petitioning organization's owner joined the Board of Directors of the Nantucket Preservation Trust in 2002. 
While the latter article refers to the petitioning organization as a "respected business," the evidence is 
insufficient to establish that it enjoys a "distinguished reputation." 
The evidence does not establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
EAC'O~ 204 50274 
Page 4 
Evidence 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 ofice receipts, motion picture or television ratings, and other 
occupational achievements reported in trade journals, major newspapers, or otherpublications. 
The petitioner submitted no evidence that the beneficiary met this criterion with the petition or in response to the 
director's request for evidence (RFE) dated August 3 1, 2004. Although counsel stated that evidence relating to 
this criterion was submitted on appeal, he does not specify the evidence he believes is applicable and none of the 
documentation submitted appears to relate to this criterion. The evidence does not establish that the beneficiary 
meets ths criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has received signiJicant recognition for achievements from organizations, critics, 
governmental agencies, or other recognized experts in the field in which the alien is engaged. Such 
testimonials must be in a form which clearly indicates the author's authority, expertise, and knowledge of the 
alien's achievements. 
In a letter dated March 19, 2004, 
 'Course Leader BA/HND Restoration and Decorative Studies" 
at the University of Portsmouth, 
 beneficiary's final year of study at the university: 
 , 
[Slhe was commissioned to produce and install an altarpiece for a listed church in Portsmouth 
following the original architect's drawings of the mid 1800s. This work was exemplary for 
which she has received the highest accolades. 
Her part time studies at the local college were also outstanding, for which she was entered for 
the Unibond £5,000 Award, which she deservedly won. This is an award given by industry for 
outstanding professionalism and commitment. 
She has also been registered as a member of the Worshipful Company of Plaisterers, which is 
a Guild based in London, UK, founded in the 19" century as a foundation in the promotion of 
excellence in the profession. 
The petitioner submitted no evidence to substantiate the recognition that Mr. ated that the beneficiary 
received for her work at the Portsmouth church. Going on record without suvvorting: documentary evidence is 
- A. " 
not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of ~ofJici, 22 I&N 
Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 
1972)). On appeal, the petitioner submits what appear to be statements by the beneficiary, indicating that she 
worked on the St. Agathers Church in Landport, Portsmouth and Stowe The record is 
unclear as to whether these projects are the same ones referenced letter. An article in the 
January 29, 2004 edition of Country Life discusses the restoration of 
is not identified as one of those responsible for the restoration. 
In an undated letter, 
 the trade developments manager for Henkel Consumer Adhesives, stated: 
[The beneficiary] applied for a major award sponsored by this company that required 
students to not only prove their technical excellence but to demonstrate with a detailed 
business plan how they would use a bursary of £5000 to further their career in construction. 
[The beneficiary's] submission was assessed by a marketing,and business studies panel as 
the clear winner and the award was duly presented to her by this company. 
EAC 04 204 50274 
Page 5 
M- letter does not reflect that the award given by his company was for excellence in the beneficiary's 
field o endeavor but rather for business acumen in running and marketing a business. The documentation does 
not reflect that the beneficiary was recognized for her slull in historical or decorative restoration. 
, "Head of School Construction & Building Studies" at Highbury College, stated in a letter dated May 
t the beneficiw was "an excellent student . . . throughout her 2 years with us. She managed to 
cbmp~ete the course succeisf~ll~, which is a magnificent achievement in what is primarily a male dominated 
profession." Mrq letter does not attach any significance to the beneficiary's studies beyond her 
accomplishment in comp e ng a school denominated by males. Mr. -did not allege and the petitioner 
submitted no evidence of any significant recognition for achievement bestowed upon the beneficiary as a result of 
this schooling. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a December 15,2004 letter from 
 who states that he is a plasterer 
with 4lyears of experience and who regularly gves talks and lectures. n Mr. her states: 
During the second half of 2004, at 
 have had the pleasure of meeting and 
worlung with [the beneficiary]. She is one of those rare individuals, in that sometimes two 
things come together and work, a conservator and a plasterer, a combination that is not always 
possible, a university degree with a craft slulls qualification, one requiring academic study, the 
other a through [sic] knowledge of a practical craft, there is one other talent that is absolutely 
essential, the ability to use your hands, [she] has all these virtue's [sic], plus a hard working 
attitude to the problems met with on site. 
~r.oes not identify any specific achievements of the beneficiary that would indicate she has achieved 
acclaim in the field of restoration. 
On appeal, the petitioner submitted documentation providing background information on the Associates of the 
Worshipful Company of Plaisterers. The documentation indicates that practicing plasterers can apply for 
membership in the organization if they meet qualifications such as serving a full apprenticeship, obtaining 
their gilds craft certificates, or obtaining certain levels on skills tests. These qualifications as outlined by the 
organization do not indicate a specific recognition for accomplishments. 
The evidence does not establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence 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 petitioner stated on the Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonirnrnigrant Worker, that it would pay the beneficiary 
$30 per hour. With the petition, the petitioner submitted a copy of a February 19, 2004 letter from the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Division of Employment and Training, indicating that the prevailing wage for 
an "old house restoration design historian and advisor" was $20.26 per hour. This determination was valid until 
January 3,2005. 
On appeal, the petitioner stated that, while "much of her work will be contracted at a firm price, we'll be able to 
command $120-$150 per hour" for the beneficiary's work in scagliola, "depending on who we're worlung for." 
The petitioner contrasts that with the $55-$65 per hour that it would charge for its "best woodworkers." The 
EAC 04 204 50274 
Page 6 
petitioner also submitted a letter from 
 of Nantucket Decorative Painting, whostated that she 
would pay $150 an hour for scagliola work. 
The petitioner, however, must demonstrate that the beneficiary's salary places her at the top of her field at the 
national level, not simply at what her work would command at the local level. Local prevailing wage figures 
do not meet this standard. We find no evidence showing that the beneficiary is among the highest-paid in her 
field at the national or international level. 
The petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
There is a final issue in this proceeding. Under section 101(a)(15)(0) of the Act, a qualified alien may be 
authorized to come to the United States to perform services relating to an event or events if petitioned for by an 
employer. 8 C.F.R. 214.2(o)(l)(i). The term "event" is defined at 8 C.F.R. 214.2(0)(3)(ii) as an activity such as, 
but not limited to, a scientific project, conference, convention, lecture series, tour, exhibit, business project, 
academic year, or engagement. 
The director noted that the petitioner did not specify a particular time frame for the beneficiary's employment and 
therefore the petitioner had not established the existence of an event. The petitioner has made no reference to a 
specific point in time at which the beneficiary's services will no longer be required. The examples provided by 
the regulation suggest occurrences or phenomena of definite and finite duration. Therefore, the existence of an 
event has not been established. 
After a careful review of the entire record, it is concluded that the petitioner has not shown that the 
beneficiary is a person of extraordinary ability in restoration. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial decision. See 
Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), affd. 345 F.3d 683 
(9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the AAO reviews 
appeals on a de novo basis). 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. 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. 9 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.