dismissed O-1B Case: Music

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarr~nted 
invasion of personal pnvacy 
PUBLIC COpy 
u.s. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: JUL 1 ! 2011 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker under Section 101(a)(l5)(O)(i) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1101(a)(15)(O)(i) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The matter 
is now before the Administrative Appeals Office ("AAO") on appeal. The AAO will dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner, a record label, filed this nonimmigrant petition seeking to classify the beneficiary pursuant to 
section 101(a)(lS)(O)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1101(a)(1S)(O) as an alien 
with extraordinary ability in the arts. The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary as a musician/drummer and 
member of the U.S.-based hardcore ban~ for a period of five years.
l 
The director denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary qualifies as 
an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The director determined that the evidence submitted was insufficient 
to establish that the beneficiary's achievements and recognition have reached the level of "distinction" as defined 
at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(ii). The director observed that the evidence submitted failed to meet any of the 
evidentiary criteria set forth at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0 )(3)(iv)(A) or (B). 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and forwarded 
the appeal to the AAO for review. On appeal, counsel refers to the evidentiary criteria applicable to immigrant 
petitions for aliens of extraordinary ability pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(h)(3), and asserts that the petitioner has 
established the beneficiary's eligibility under at least four of these criteria. Finally, counsel asserts that new 
evidence submitted on appeal establishes that the beneficiary "is in fact a drummer with extraordinary ability in 
the field of punk music." Counsel submits a brief and documentary evidence in support of the appeal. 
I. The Law 
Section 101(a)(1S)(O)(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 regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 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 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. 
1 Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(6)(iii)(A), an approved petltIOn for an alien classified under section 
101 (a)(1S)(O)(i) of the Act shall be valid for a period of time determined by the Director to be necessary to 
accomplish the event or activity, not to exceed 3 years. 
Page 3 
The regulation at 8 c.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv) states, in pertinent part: 
Evidentiary criteria for an 0-1 alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. To qualifY as an alien 
of extraordinary ability in the field of 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 the recipient of, significant national 
or international awards or prizes in the particular field such as an Academy Award, an 
Emmy, a Grammy, or a Director's Guild Award; or 
(B) At least three ofthe 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; 
(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, government 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 
Page 4 
(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; or 
(C) If the criteria in paragraph (0)(3)(iv) of this section do not readily apply to the 
beneficiary's occupation, the petitioner may submit comparable evidence in order to 
establish the beneficiary's eligibility. 
Additionally, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(2)(iii) provides: 
The evidence submitted with an 0 petition shall conform to the following: 
(A) Affidavits, contracts, awards, and similar documentation must reflect the nature of the 
alien's achievement and be executed by an officer or responsible person employed by the 
institution, firm, establishment, or organization where the work was performed. 
(B) Affidavits written by present or former employers or recognized experts certifying to the 
recognition and extraordinary ability ... of the alien shall specifically describe the alien's 
recognition and ability or achievement in factual terms and set forth the expertise of the 
affiant and the manner in which the affiant acquired such information. 
The decision of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in a particular case is dependent upon the 
quality of the evidence submitted by the petitioner, not just the quantity of the evidence. The mere fact that the 
petitioner has submitted evidence relating to three of the criteria as required by the regulation does not 
necessarily establish that the alien is eligible for 0-1 classification. See 59 Fed. Reg. 41818 (August 15, 
1994)(Final Rule). 
In determining the beneficiary's eligibility under these criteria, the AAO will follow a two-part approach set forth 
in a 2010 decision issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Kazarian v. USCIS, 2010 WL 
725317 (9th Cir. March 4, 2010). Similar to the regulations governing this nonimmigrant classification, the 
regulations reviewed by the Kazarian court require the petitioner to submit evidence pertaining to at least three 
out of ten alternative criteria in order to establish a beneficiary's eligibility as an alien with extraordinary ability. 
Cj 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
Specifically, the Kazarian court stated that "the proper procedure is to count the types of evidence provided 
(which the AAO did)," and if the petitioner failed to submit sufficient evidence, "the proper conclusion is that the 
applicant has failed to satisfy the regulatory requirement of three types of evidence (as the AAO concluded)." Id 
at *6 (citing to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)). The court also explained the "final merits determination" as the corollary 
to this procedure: 
Page 5 
If a petitioner has submitted the requisite evidence, USCIS determines whether the evidence 
demonstrates both a "level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small 
percentage who have risen to the very top of the [ir] field of endeavor," 8 c.P.R. § 204.5(h)(2), 
and "that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her 
achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." 8 c.P.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Only aliens 
whose achievements have garnered "sustained national or international acclaim" are eligible for 
an "extraordinary ability" visa. 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(1)(A)(i). 
Id. at *3. 
Thus, Kazarian sets forth a two-part approach where the evidence is first counted and then, if qualifying under at 
least three criteria, considered in the context of a merits determination. The merits determination analyzes 
whether the evidence is consistent with the statutory requirement of "extensive documentation" and the regulatory 
definition of" extraordinary ability" as "one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor." 
The AAO finds the Kazarian court's two-part approach to be appropriate for evaluating the regulatory criteria set 
forth for 0-1 nonimmigrant petitions for aliens of extraordinary ability at 8 c.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iii), (iv) and (v). 
Therefore, in reviewing Service Center decisions, the AAO will apply the test set forth in Kazarian. 
II. Discussion 
The sole issue to be addressed is whether the petitioner submitted evidence to establish that the beneficiary 
satisfies the evidentiary criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(A), or at least three ofthe six criteria set forth at 8 
C.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B). 
The petitioner filed the Porm 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, and supporting documentation on 
September 23,2010. The director issued a request for additional evidence (RFE) on September 29,2010, to 
which the petitioner replied on October 4, 2010. The AAO has considered the evidence of record in its 
entirety in reaching its decision. 
In a letter dated September 22, 2010, counsel stated that the beneficiary is a classically-trained musician in 
both drums and piano, who graduated from the 
Counsel noted that, following graduation, the beneficiary joined 
performed throughout Europe and the United States before leaving the band at the end of 2008. 
recently, the beneficiary joined the New York-based hardcore punk band, which signed a 
contract with the petitioner's record label in September 2009. The evidence of record shows that_ 
released its third studio album on the petitioner's label in June 20 1 0, and has been engaged in a national and 
international tour throughout 2010. 
Page 6 
Counsel asserts that the beneficiary has "a high level of achievement within the field of independent 
musicians and bands." Counsel further claims that the beneficiary "is known throughout the world as a gifted 
and musician by virtue of his participation in his former band, _ and as a current 
" Counsel contends that the beneficiary and _ "are fast becoming 
household names among America's youth and among music industry insiders." 
In a letter submitted in support of the petition, the petitioner's general manager, , stated that 
_ is "currently on the peak of exploding to a high level of fame in the national and international 
market," and "is on the cusp of making serious money from its tour ticket sales and merchandise and CD 
sales." further stated that the band is "among the top 200 bands in the U.S. and in their 
particular genre number 33 overall." 
A. The Evidentiary Criteria 
If the petitioner establishes through the submission of documentary evidence that the beneficiary has been 
nominated for or has been the recipient of, significant national or international awards or prizes in the particular 
field pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(A), then it will meet its burden of proof with respect to the 
beneficiary's eligibility for 0-1 classification. The regulation lists an Academy Award, an Emmy, a Grammy, or 
a Director's Guild award as examples of qualifYing significant awards or prizes. 
The beneficiary's former band,_ was nominated in the category in the 2008 
annual s. g is a British music magazine of unknown circulation. The petitioner did not 
claim that this award nomination was comparable to a Grammy award nomination, and raised no objection to the 
director's finding that the evidence submitted does not establish the beneficiary's eligibility under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(A). 
Therefore, the petitioner must establish the beneficiary's eligibility under at least three of the six criteria set forth 
at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B). We note that neither counsel nor the petitioner has specifically addressed the 
beneficiary's eligibility under the applicable regulatory criteria. The AAO will consider the beneficiary's 
eligibility under each of the six criteria below. 
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; 
and 
As noted above, the evidence of record indicates that the beneficiary has been the drummer for the hardcore 
bands_ and _, and will continue to be a member of _ if the requested 
classification is granted. 
Page 7 
The petitioner submitted evidence that _ debut full-length album, received highly 
favorable reviews in the alternative music press, positive reviews for live shows, and a nomination as_ 
in the 2008 by the British rock music magazine The 
director determined that, based on his experience as the drummer and a founding member the 
petitioner established that the beneficiary has performed in a lead or starring role for productions or events which 
have a distinguished reputation. 
With respect to_, the director acknowledged that the petitioner submitted evidence that the band "has 
received coverage in magazines such as the American Music Press and coverage on several Internet websites." 
The director found that the evidence "did not establish a distinguished reputation." 
Upon review, the AAO disagrees with the director's determination. The petitioner has submitted sufficient 
evidence in the form of critical reviews, advertisements and publications to establish that the beneficiary satisfies 
the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B)(l) based upon his role as the drummer for the studio recordings and 
live performances of Dead Swans and This is Hell. 
_ has been invited to join sponsored by music magazine as one of six 
featured bands on the national tour's roster. According to the evidence of record, the Fall 2010 tour was set to 
take place in October and November 2010 with dates at well-known venues such as 
the band was featured in the magazine as a result of its 
selection for the tour. The petitioner has also submitted articles and reviews from alternative music magazines 
that are sufficient to establish that the band's recordings and live shows have a distinguished reputation among 
industry publications that cover the band's genre of music. 
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 
The plain language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B)(2) requires the petitioner to demonstrate 
that the beneficiary has achieved national or international recognition for achievements through submission of 
critical reviews or other published materials by or about the individual in major newspapers, trade journals, 
magazines, or other publications. In general, in order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be 
primarily about the beneficiary and, as stated in the regulations, be printed in major newspapers, magazines or 
other major publications. To qualify as major media, the publication should have significant national or 
international distribution. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, nominally serve a particular locality 
but would qualify as major media because of significant national distribution, unlike small local community 
papers? 
2 Even with nationally-circulated newspapers, consideration must be given to the placement of the article. For 
example, an article that appears in the Washington Post, but in a section that is distributed only in Fairfax 
County, Virginia, for instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 8 
The director determined that the petitioner failed to submit any published materials about the beneficiary from 
major newspapers, trade journals, magazines or other publications. The director observed that the beneficiary 
was mentioned casually in some articles as a member of the bands and_, but that such 
evidence is insufficient to establish that he has received national or international recognition as a drummer. 
On appeal, counsel asserts: 
[The beneficiary's] national and international recogmtIOn for achievement in the arts is 
derived from his participation in the ensemble groups,_ (former band) and _ 
_ (current band). USCIS erred in finding that the petitioner provided insufficient evidence 
to establish that [the beneficiary], individually, has gained national or international 
recognition as a drummer. The position of drummer does not allow for individual 
recognition. It is not the position of lead singer or lead guitarist, positions within a band that 
lend themselves to individual recognition. Rather, the drummer provides the background for 
the overall band sound. The drummer provides the beat and emphasizes the other instruments 
and the vocals. The drummer is essentially a band "member" and is a required and influential 
part of the overall band sound and performance. The drummer is not, however, a member of 
the band that garners individual media attention and/or critical review. Accordingly, USCIS 
erred in finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate the beneficiary's individual ability as 
a drummer and that the petitioner was errant in providing supporting documentation that" ... 
only mentioned casually [the beneficiary] in articles as a member of the band .... " 
Upon review, the AAO agrees with the director's determination that the petitioner has not submitted evidence 
to satisfy this criterion. 
The petitioner has not submitted any published materials that are specifically "about" the beneficiary as an 
individual, despite counsel's initial claims that the beneficiary'S "talent has earned him rave reviews from 
critics across the nation" and that "he and his band are fast becoming household names." Counsel further 
claimed that the evidence would establish that the beneficiary is "among the very most distinguished and 
extraordinary drummers of any kind in the hardcore punk genre." Counsel also refers to the beneficiary'S 
"early individual international achievements," stating that he is a "drum prodigy" but the record remains 
devoid of any such individual achievements or any evidence to support the statements made above. Without 
documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of 
proof. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 
533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N 
Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for 
purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofjici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 
(Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm'r. 1972)). 
In light of counsel's claims regarding the beneficiary's individual reputation, counsel's assertions that it is not 
possible for a drummer to gain individual recognition or attention based on his or her own abilities and 
Page 9 
achievements is simply not credible. There are entire magazines and websites devoted to drumming and 
drummers which feature musicians who, like the beneficiary, play in bands. 
The petitioner submitted one published article in which the beneficiary is quoted extensively and not merely 
mentioned in passing. The article is titled "Dead Swans: Express Deliveries .... " The title of the publication 
and date of the publication were not provided and thus it cannot be determined that it appeared in a major 
newspaper or magazine. The article consists of background information regarding the musical roots of the 
band and an interview with the band members regarding the recording of their debut album •••••• 
While the author of the article speaks very positively of the album, referring to it as "one of the year's most 
exciting UKHC releases," the article fails to recognize the beneficiary's individual achievements as a musician 
or the national and international recognition he received for such achievements. Accordingly, the petitioner 
has not submitted evidence that meets the plain language of the evidentiary criterion at 8 c.P .R. 
214.2( 0 )(3)(iv)(B)(2). 
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 
The director determined that the beneficiary has performed a critical role for an organization that has a 
distinguished reputation as a member of_ However, the director concluded that the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish that the beneficiary will perform similar critical roles for the petitioner as it 
failed to establish that its record label has a distinguished reputation. Accordingly, the director concluded that the 
petitioner had not submitted evidence to satisfy the evidentiary criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B)(3). 
The AAO will withdraw the director's finding with respect to this criterion. We note that the director's reasoning 
was inconsistent, as he concluded that the band is an "organization or establishment" with a 
distinguished reputation, but did not consider the reputation of the band , instead choosing to consider 
whether the petitioner established the distinguished reputation of the band's record label. The petitioner has 
submitted evidence that both _ and have been featured in national American and British 
alternative music publications and are in demand for national and international tours. The record shows that~ 
••• was nominated by the British rock music magazine as the 
among bands of many genres. _ has been on the cover of 
_ The evidence of record is sufficient to establish that both bands enjoy a distinguished reputation in 
the alternative music industry. 
The evidence submitted meets the plain language of the regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B)(3). Therefore, 
this criterion has been satisfied. 
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 
Page 10 
picture or television ratings, and other occupational achievements reported in trade journals, 
major newspapers, or other publications 
The plain language of the regulation at 8 c.P.R. § 214.2(0)(3)(iv)(B)(4) requires 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. In the beneficiary's field, evidence satisfying this criterion would 
reasonably include evidence of album or single sales, radio airplay rankings, evidence of concert revenues and 
similar evidence of tangible achievements in the music industry. 
At the time of filing the petition, counsel indicated that the beneficiary and his band have been propelled to 
"national and international fame and commercial success." Counsel further stated that_ is "hugely 
popular on the internet, on My Space and You Tube and is fast becoming a record holder for CD and 
merchandise sales." In addition, the petitioner's general manager indicated that_ is "among the top 200 
bands in the United States and in their particular genre number 22 overall," and he indicated 
album is one of his company's "best-selling records." 
However, the supporting evidence contained no documentation to corroborate the band's claimed best-selling 
status, and no objective rankings to support the petitioner's statements were submitted prior to the 
adjudication of the petition. Similarly, the petitioner has not submitted evidence of the major commercial or 
critically acclaimed success of the beneficiary'S work with . On appeal, counsel for the petitioner 
assert that "according to _ has sold over 20,000 CDs to date." The petitioner 
did not submit any documentary evidence in support of this claim. Again, without documentary evidence to 
support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported 
assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. at 534); Matter of 
Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. at 506. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. at 
165 (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm'r. 1972)). Regardless, even 
if the petitioner did submit evidence of the band's CD sales, the petitioner has not established that the sale of 
20,000 CDs constitutes major commercial success, particularly if this figure applies to the band's entire 
catalog. The petitioner indicates that its label has sold over 1 million CDs to date inclusive of all of their 
artists, a figure which undermines the claim that the petitioner is among the label's top sellers. As noted by 
the director, the fact CD is distributed in major retail stores alone is insufficient to establish 
that the band has a record of major commercial success. 
While we have acknowledged that the critical reviews the beneficiary'S bands have received for their live 
shows and recordings have given them a distinguished reputation among critics and industry writers in the 
hardcore punk genre of alternative rock music, the record does not demonstrate that either band or the 
beneficiary individually has achieved major critically-acclaimed successes, as required by the plain language 
of the regulation. Por example, an article about _ indicates that their 
current album "could well be the release that sees _ step out of the shadow of their more 
heavily fancied peers and into the mainstream spotlight." In another article 
submitted on appeal, titled "Hardcore band_ back with new members, record and label," the band's 
Page 11 
lead guitarist mentions that the group is "hardly making any money" despite near constant national and 
international touring and frequent opportunities to tour with bigger acts, thus undermining claims of the 
band's commercial success. 
Based on the foregoing, the petitioner has not submitted evidence to satisfy the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2( 0 )(3)(iv)(B)( 4). 
Evidence that the alien has received significant recognition for achievements from 
organizations, critics, government 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; 
The petitioner has provided a total of three testimonial letters in support of the petition. For the reasons 
discussed below, the letters do not satisfy the plain language of the regulatory criterion at 8 § C.F.R. 
214.2( 0 )(3)(iv)(B)(5). 
The petitioner provided a peer review letter from an artist manager with Artery Foundation 
Artist Management. I stated: 
_ is an internationally acclaimed hardcore punk band from New York. The band's 
drummer is [the beneficiary], a gifted British musician known throughout Europe and the 
United States for his association and work wit~and ••••• 
[The beneficiary] is a musician of international renown, who is well-known in his native 
England and internationally. Both_ and _1 have toured extensively in 
Europe and the United States. Accordingly, [the beneficiary] and his band, , have 
gained an international following and international critical acclaim. 
As noted above, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(2)(iii)(B) requires that affidavits written by recognized 
experts "shall specifically describe the alien's recognition and ability or achievement in factual terms and set forth 
the expertise of the affiant and the manner in which the affiant acquired such information." _ letter 
fails to establish his credentials as a recognized expert, fails to explain the manner in which he acquired 
information about the beneficiary, and fails to specifically describe the beneficiary's achievements in factual 
terms. The letter consists of general assertions regarding the beneficiary's international acclaim and renown, but 
fails to detail the beneficiary' specific achievements. Furthermore, it is not in a form which clearly indicates. 
_ authority, expertise and knowledge of such achievements. 
submitted a second letter from the beneficiary's former instructor at" 
_ states that the beneficiary achieved his Diploma and 
Professional Diploma qualifications in drumming "to a good standard" and refers to him as a "studious and 
reliable member of his class, who worked hard to improve his playing." While he acknowledges the