dismissed O-1B Case: Motion Picture

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-F-P- LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 24,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a motion picture production company, seeks to classify the Beneficiary, an actor. as 
an individual of extraordinary achievement in motion picture or television productions. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(0)(i), 8 U.S.C. ~ 1101(a)(15)(0)(i). 
This 0-1 classification makes nonimmigrant visas available to foreign nationals whose achievements 
in this industry have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Beneficiary met at least three of the six evidentiary criteria. 
Specifically, the Director found that the Petitioner did not satisfy any of the criteria. In addition. the 
Director concluded that the Petitioner did not submit the required written consultations from an 
appropriate union representing the Beneficiary's occupational peers and a management organization 
in the area of the Beneficiary's extraordinary achievement. 
On appeal, the Petitioner otTers additional evidence and asserts that the Beneficiary meets three 
regulatory criteria and has a record of extraordinary achievement. The Petitioner further asserts that 
the consultations provided are evidence of the Beneficiary's extraordinary achievement in film. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
As relevant here, section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act provides classification to a qualified beneficiary 
who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement with regard to motion picture and 
television productions, 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 implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii) clarities, in pe11inent pm1: 
Extraordinary achievement with respect to motion picture and television productions, as 
commonly defined in the industry, means a very high level of accomplishment in the 
motion picture or television industry evidenced by a degree of skill and recognition 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered to the extent that the person is recognized 
as outstanding, notable, or leading in the motion picture or television field. 
.
Matter qf M-F-P- LLC 
Next, the regulations set forth the evidentiary criteria for establishing recognition of a beneficiary" s 
achievements. A petitioner must either submit evidence of the beneficiary"s nomination or receipt of 
significant national or international awards or prizes in the particular field such as an Academy A ward. 
an Emmy, a Grammy, or a Director's Guild Award, or provide documentation satisfying at least three 
of the six categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(A)-(B). When a petitioner 
provides the requisite evidence, we then determine whether the record. viewed in its totality. shows a 
record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture and television industry and demonstrates that 
the beneficiary's achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. 
Further, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(E) imposes the following requirements on 
petitions tiled by United States agents: 
Agents as petitioners. A United States agent may tile a petition in cases involving 
workers who are traditionally self-employed or workers who use agents to arrange 
short-term employment on their behalf with numerous employers. and in cases where 
a foreign employer authorizes the agent to act in its behalf. A United States agent 
may be: The actual employer of the beneficiary; the representative of both the 
employer and the beneficiary; or a person or entity authorized by the employer to act 
for, or in place of, the employer as its agent. A petition tiled by an agent is subject to 
the following conditions: 
(1) An agent performing the function of an employer must provide the contractual 
agreement between the agent and the beneficiary which specifies the wage 
offered and the other terms and conditions of employment of the beneficiary. 
(2) A person or company in business as an agent may tile the petition involving 
multiple employers as the representative of both the employers and the 
beneficiary, if the supporting documentation includes a complete itinerary of 
the event or events. The itinerary must specify the dates of each service or 
engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers. and the names 
and addresses of the establishments, venues or locations where the services 
will be performed. A contract between the employers and the beneficiary is 
required. The burden is on the agent to explain the terms and conditions of 
the employment and to provide any required documentation. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Introduction 
The Petitioner filed the Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. and supporting 
documentation, seeking to employ the Beneficiary as an actress for a period of three years. In its 
initial letter the Petitioner explained that it seeks to have the Beneficiary perform services as an 
actress in its films '' and ' In addition, the record indicates the Petitioner will 
2 
.
Malter of M-F-P- LLC 
serve as an agent for for its production · and for 
for its film' The evidence submitted includes the Petitioner's 
deal memos with the Beneficiary, deal memos between the Beneficiary and the two additional 
production companies, the required consultations. and several testimonial letters. 
B. Consultation Requirements 
Pursuant to section 214(c)(3)(A) , an 0-1 petition with respect to individuals seeking entry for a 
motion picture or television production shall be approved only after consultation with the 
appropriate union representing the individual 's occupational peers and a management organization 
in the area of the individual's ability. In the case of an alien working on a motion picture or 
television production, consultation shall be made with the appropriate union representing the 
individual's occupational peers and a management organization in the area of the her ability 
describing her achievements in the motion picture or television field , stating whether the position 
requires the services of an alien of extraordinary achievement. If a consulting organization has no 
objection to the approval of the petition , the organization may submit a letter of no objection in lieu 
ofthe above. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(5)(iii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides an advisory opinion from of the 
a management organization in the Beneficiary's field. 
The letter states that it is the opinion of the organization that "'the Beneficiary has a history of 
extraordinary achievement in this field of endeavor and that the prospective services clearly require 
an individual with this level of professional and artistic achievement. .. The Petitioner also provide s a 
letter from of the 
expressing '"no objection " to the Beneficiar y's proposed work on 
the films and · 
As such, the Petitioner has met the consultation requirements under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(5)(iii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner further maintains that the consultations are evidence of the Beneficiary's 
extraordinary achievement in the field, and that the Director's ''decision to ignore the consultation s 
as proof of the Beneficiary's extraordinary ability is capricious and arbitrary ... We disagree. Whil e 
the submitted consultations meet the requir ements of 8 C.F.R . § 214.2(o)(5) , the regulation s also 
require evidence satisfying the regulator y criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(A)-(B). The 
consultation authors do not address whether the Beneficiary meets the rele vant evidentiar y criteria 
demonstrating extraordinary achievement , describe in any detail her achievements in the field. or 
explain the nature of the work to be done. Rather , states that 
has "no objections to the granting of a temporary 0-1 visa.'· Similarly, while states that 
"the beneficiary has a history of extraordinary achievement" and that supports "the granting 
of an 0-1 visa for the beneficiary,'' she does not list her specific film or production achievements. or 
the regulatory criteria which those achievements satisfy. Moreover. neith er consultation details how 
the Beneficiary is an indi vidual of extraordinar y achievement in the tele vision or motion picture 
industry . or what particular evidence they reviewed in issuing their letters. 
.
Matter of M-F-P- LLC 
C. Extraordinary Achievement in the Motion Picture or Television Industry 
The next issue to be addressed is whether the Petitioner offered evidence to establish that the 
Beneficiary satisfies the evidentiary criterion at 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(3)(v)(A) or at least three of the six 
categories listed at 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(J)-(6). In denying the pet1t10n. the 
Director determined that the Petitioner did not claim the Beneficiary met the evidentiary criterion at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(A), and he further found that she did not meet any of the alternative 
regulatory criteria. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary meets the criteria f(w lead 
or starring participant in productions or events with a distinguished reputation under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(l); leading or critical role for organizations and establishments that have a 
distinguished reputation under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(3); and significant recognition for 
achievements from organizations, critics, government agencies, or other recognized expe11s in the 
field under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(5). As discussed below. \VC find that the Petitioner has not 
established that the Beneficiary meets any of the claimed criteria. 
Evidence that the alien has performed. and 1-t>il/ perform . services as a lead or 
starring participant in productions or events which have a distin~uished reputation 
as evidenced by critical reviews. advertisements. publicity releases. publications . 
contracts. or endorsements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(/). 
The Petitioner maintains on appeal that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion based upon her past 
roles in four short films: " and ·· However. the 
record lacks sufficient documentary evidence of most of these productions to establish that the 
Beneficiary played a lead or starring role. The Petitioner did not provide evidence regarding the tilm 
and the only documentation it offered regarding •· includes a schedule of films 
screened at the listing the film and identifying the Beneficiary as 
one of seven members of the cast. Similarly, the Petitioner provided promotional literature for the 
film ' · which notes the Beneficiary as one of six members of the cast, but does not designate 
her role as a leading role. 1 The record does confirm the Beneficiary's leading role in· 
'through publicity releases. 
However, the Petitioner must also establish through the submission of critical reviews. 
advertisements, publicity releases, contracts, or endorsements that the films themselves have a 
distinguished reputation. The Petitioner provided documentation that · was 
selected for the m 2015 and described the awards as a 
"monthly awards competition that allows filmmakers from all over the world to enter their short 
films to get it judged by industry professionals and compete with other filmmakers.'' The Petitioner 
1 The record also includes a letter from the Vice President describing the 
Beneficiary's performances in " .. and · However. the letter does not provide 
sufficient detail regarding the Beneficiary's roles in the films to demonstrate that they were leading or starring. Further. 
the letter does not address the reputation of the films noted, nor is it a critical review, advertisement. publicity release. 
publication, contract, or endorsement as required by the regulation. 
4 
.
Matter ofM-F-P- LLC 
did not document the reach of the or provide evidence that a film's 
nomination for the award is commensurate having a distinguished reputation. Therefore. the 
Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary served in a leading role for a production with a 
distinguished reputation. 
In addition. the Petitioner must establish that the Beneficiary ll'i!/ be pcrfcm11ing \<.T\ ices as :.1 lead or 
starring participant in productions or events with a distinguished reputation. In the initial letter. the 
Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will be \vorking on various film projects while in the United 
States including·· ·and · The record 
does not contain sullicient evidence to document the distinguished reputation or till' 11lms. While the 
submitted deal memos confirm that the Beneficiary will perfclrm as a lead or starring participant in 
each film. they do not contain information suggesting that the films will have a distinguished 
reputation. For example, the deal memos do not remark on the past successes of the director 
production company, or actors. or otherwise remark on the pre-release expectations l()r the film. The 
record does include evidence that . the director of ·· has won 
awards for his previous work: however. it does not suftlciently demonstrate the prestige of his 
upcoming productions or his recognition in general to support a finding that his future projects me 
anticipated at such a level that they can be said to enjoy a distinguished reputation. On appeal. thl' 
Petitioner notes that the script for ·' was a 2015 · quarter­
finalist: however. it has not explained the significance of this award or shown that being a quarter­
finalist in this contest is reflective of a distinguished reputation. \Vithoul corroboration or th<.' 
reputation of these prospective projects, the Petitioner has not met its burden 
Evidence that the alien has performed. and w;/l pe1:fimn. in a lead. starring or critical 
role for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation 
evidenced by articles in new.\papers. trade journals. publications. or testimonials 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(J). 
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. The appeal focuses on her participation in productions and 
events. Specifically, the Petitioner maintains on appeal that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion 
based upon her leading role in the short film " · which aired on the 
television channel in Ukraine, operated by the It further 
asserts that the Beneficiary also played a leading role in several televised commercials for brands 
and both produced by a transnational food and drink company. 
This criterion, however, is separate from the previously discussed criterion requiring evidence of her 
performance of services as a lead or starring participant in a production or event. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(3)(v)(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. 
Even if the Petitioner had established the distinguished reputation of the productions discussed 
above, the record does not verify that her lead or starring participation in those movies constitutes a 
.
Matter of M-F-P- LLC 
lead, starring, or critical role for the overall production companies. The submissions do not describe 
the duties the Beneficiary performed for any organization in her various roles. and do not establish 
how her position fit within the overall hierarchy of the organizations. 
For example, the testimonial letters, while complementary of the Beneficiary's performance in 
' do not specify how her role fits into the hierarchy of to show that it is a leading 
role, nor do they clarify how her work was critical to the success and standing of this organization. 
In addition, the Petitioner did not corroborate that the organization enjoys a distinguished reputation. 
Although the Petitioner provided an excerpt from Wikipedia describing we note that there 
are no assurances about the reliability of the content from Wikipedia, an open. user-edited website. 
See Lamilem Badasa v. Michael Mukasey, 540 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 2008). Similarly, the Petitioner 
has not adequately shown that the Beneficiary has performed in a lead, starring. or critical role for 
the businesses whose products she has advertised. The record does not contain the required 
documentary evidence in the form of articles in newspapers, trade journals, publications. or 
testimonials pertaining to the reputation of nor docs 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. As previously stated, the petition and 
the deal memo indicate that the Beneficiary will 
work for the Petitioner and two additional production companies over a three year period. The 
record does not include evidence explaining how the Beneficiary's role as an actor in the noted films 
rises to the level of a lead, starring or critical role for either the petitioning production company or 
the two additional companies for whom she intends to work. While the Petitioner has established 
the Beneficiary's job title relating to the upcoming film projects, the submitted evidence does not 
describe how she will contribute to the overall companies, or how her proposed positions fit within 
the hierarchy of the organizations. 
Finally, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that the production 
companies enjoy distinguished reputations. As previously noted. the plain language of this criterion 
requires the submission of evidence in the form of newspapers. trade journals, publications. or 
testimonials. In light of the above, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary satisfies 
the requirements of this evidentiary criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has received significant recognition fhr achievements .fi"om 
organizations. critics. government agencies. or other recognized experts in the field 
in which the alien is engaged. Such testimonials must be in a fimn which clearly 
indicates the author ·s authority. expertise. and kmxwledge of' the alien ·s 
achievements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(5). 
In support of this criterion, the Petitioner submitted several letters from colleagues with whom the 
Beneficiary worked on various films. For example, a 
fellow actress. states that the 
Beneficiary is ·'able to play roles efficiently and effectively in multiple languages." and that she '·will 
.
Matter of M-F-P- LLC 
continue to bring a very detail-oriented focus to television and films." Similarly, a 
producer, states that "'her versatile talents exceed that of the confines of a conventional actress:· 
a producer of the Beneficiary's short film, ' describes her "flawless 
portrayal of the main character," and states that she "is a "'distinctive actress of commercials and films." 
writer, director, and production designer, who worked with the Beneficiary on the 
film describes her as "responsive, receptive, and swift," and a "team leader who steers 
stories with grace and artistic expertise." 
The record also contains a letter from the Vice President of the 
discussing the Beneficiary's performances in ' and .. The 
Petitioner contends on appeal that the letter '·confirms [the Beneficiary's] prominence in the motion 
picture and television field in Ukraine." While the letter describes the emotional quality of her roles in 
the named films and states that she '"has the singular commitment, drive, and passion to develop her 
talents to the utmost," it does not explain in factual terms the Beneficiary's achievements in the field. 
The issue for this regulatory criterion is whether the Beneficiary has received significant recognition for 
achievements from organizations, critics, government agencies. or other recognized experts in the field. 
The record lacks documentary evidence showing that the Beneficiary has received such recognition. 
Here, the letters discuss the Beneficiary's innate talent, work ethic, personal traits. and at1istry rather 
than her achievements as an actress. They do not explain or indicate that her achievements to date have 
received "significant recognition" from organizations, critics, government agencies. or other recognized 
experts in the field, nor does the record otherwise demonstrate that she has received such recognition. 
The Petitioner has, therefore, not established that the Beneficiary satisfies the plain language 
requirements of this evidentiary criterion. 
D. Agency 
Although not addressed by the Director, we find the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence 
that it has met the evidentiary requirements listed under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(E) for agents. In 
this case, the Petitioner has provided deal memos for two production companies seeking to employ 
the Beneficiary, and Both companies indicate that the 
Petitioner is acting as their agent. However, the Petitioner did not provide a complete itinerary of 
the events specifying the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the other 
employers, and the names and addresses of the establishments. venues. or locations where the 
services will be performed, as required under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(E)(2). The appeal will be 
dismissed for this additional reason. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted qualifying evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(A) or at least 
three criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B). Furthermore. the Petitioner has not met the regulatory 
requirements for agency under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(E). 
Matter of M-F-P- LLC 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of'M-F-P- LLC, ID# 628724 (AAO Oct. 24, 2017)