dismissed O-1B Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-M-, INC. 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 15.2018 
PETITION: FORM I-129. PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a production company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an assistant 
artist for its music productions. It seeks to classifY her as an 0-1 nonimmigrant. a visa classification 
available to foreign nationals who can demonstrate their extraordinary ability through sustained 
national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(0)(i). 
8 U.S.C. § IIOI(a)(15)(0)(i). 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition. concluding that the Petitioner did 
not satisfy, as required. the evidentiary criteria applicable to individuals of extraordinary ability in 
the arts: nomination for or receipt of a significant national or international or award. or at least three 
of six possible forms of documentation. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o )(3 )(iv)(A)-(B). In addition. the Director 
noted that the record contained inconsistent information as to whether the Petitioner was tiling as an 
agent or the Beneficiary's actual employer. Lastly, the Director found that the event calendar offered by 
the Petitioner was not suflicient to meet the requirements of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and maintains that the documentation satisfies 
the regulatory requirements. In addition, the Petitioner clarifies that it seeks to employ the Beneficiary 
for a term of three years. 1 
Upon de novo review. we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
As relevant here. section I 01 (a)(l5)(0)(i) of the Act establishes 0-1 classification f(Jr 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 
1 
In Part 5 of the Form 1-129. Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. the Petitioner listed the "'dates of intended 
employment" as covering a period from '"02112/2012"" to "'02/12/2023"" (II years). In its statement accompanying the 
appeal. the Petitioner states that "'the correct term of [the] contract is for 3 years.·· 
Matter ofA-M-. Inc. 
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 lew! 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.'' 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii). 
Next, DHS regulations set forth the initial evidentiary criteria for establishing a beneficiary's 
sustained acclaim and the recognition of achievements. A petitioner must submit evidence either of 
nomination for. or receipt ot: '·significant national or international awards or prizes" such as .. an 
Academy Award. an Emmy, a Grammy. or a Director's Guild Award.'' or of at least three of six listed 
categories of documents. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(A)-(B). If the petitioner demonstrates that the 
listed criteria do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation. it may submit comparable evidence 
to establish eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(C). 
The submission of documents satisfYing the initial evidentiary criteria docs not. in and of itself 
establish eligibility for 0-1 classification. See 59 Fed. Reg. 41818. 41820 (Aug. 15. 1994 )(''[T]he 
standard tor an alien of extraordinary ability in the 0-1 classification is that the alien is one of the small 
percentage of individuals who have risen to the very top of their field of endeavor. The evidence 
submitted by the petitioner is not the standard tor the classification. but merely the mechanism to 
establish whether the standard has been met. .. ). Accordingly. where a petitioner provides the requisite 
initial evidence. we then determine whether the record. viewed in its totality. shows extraordinary 
ability in the arts. See section 101(a)(15)(o)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii). (iv). 
Furthermore, an 0-1 petition ··may only be filed by a United States employer. a United States agent. 
or a foreign employer through a United States agent.'' 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(i). In addition. the 
petition must be accompanied by copies of any written contracts between the petitioner and the 
beneficiary or, if there is no written contract. a summary of the terms of the oral agreement under 
which the individual will be employed. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(B). The record should also 
include an explanation of the nature of the events or activities. the beginning and end dates for the 
events or activities. and a copy of any itinerary for the events or activities. S C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). 
II. ANALYSIS 
Before we assess eligibility tor 0-1 classification in the arts. we briefly address an ancillary matter. 
On appeal. the Petitioner indicates that it considers the Beneficiary qualified for the requested 
classification, but that it would also accept approval as an 0-2 nonimmigrant. a separate 
classification that applies to an individual who will accompany and assist an 0-1 artist or athlete. 
See section 101(a)(l5)(o)(ii) ofthe Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(l)(ii)(B). However, as the Petitioner 
expressly tiled the current petition seeking to classify the Beneficiary as an 0-1 individual of 
extraordinary ability in the arts. we will examine her eligibility only under that requested 
classification. 
2 
.
Muller of A-M-. Inc. 
A. Significant National or International Award or Prize 
As noted above, one option for satisfying the requisite initial evidentiary criteria is through evidence 
of an individual's 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). The record includes three letters from the founder and president of 
in Venezuela indicating that the Beneficiary was awarded the· 
prize on three ditlerent occasions. A September 2015 letter invites the Beneficiary to receive her 
'· ' prize "[ o ]n the occasion of the of the 
on 2015. Similarly. a January 2016 letter invites the 
Beneficiary to receive her " prize at the 
··occasion of on 2016. Lastly. the July 
2016 letter invites the Beneficiary to receive her ·· 
prize on the ·'occasion of the of the award · · (emphasis 
added) on 2016. We note that the anniversary number associated with the Beneficiary's 
2016 · prize is not sequentially consistent with the anniversary number of 
her earlier prizes. A petitioner must resolve inconsistencies in the record with independent. 
objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Afutter o{Ho . 19 l&N Dec. 582. 591-592 (BIA 
1988). Here, the Petitioner has not resolved the inconsistent letters. 
In addition, the Petitioner submits a May 2012 certiticate thanking the Beneficiary '·for her 
outstanding participation'' as a juror for the image competition·· 
The Petitioner asserts that 
this certificate constitutes an "International Award.'' The Petitioner also 
provides an email that an assistant to the manager of the sent to 
the " This email mentions that the Beneficiary and two 
other representatives from would attend a government award ceremony on 
2010, but it does not identify the name of the award being given or the type of recognition. 
Regardless, the aforementioned email, and letters from the founder and president of 
are not sufficient to demonstrate that the Beneficiary's awards rise to the level of significant 
national or international prizes or awards. For example. the record does not show that the above awards 
have attracted significant recognition beyond the context of the events where they were presented. 
Without evidence establishing that the Beneficiary's awards have 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 
Absent evidence the Beneficiary has been nominated for. or received, a significant national or 
international award or prize. the Petitioner seeks to demonstrate the Beneficiary's sustained acclaim 
and recognition of achievements through evidence corresponding to at least three of the six initial 
evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B). The Director determined that the Bencliciary 
.
,\-!after (dA-M-. Inc. 
did not satisfy any of those criteria. The Petitioner maintains on appeal that the exhibits satisfy all 
six of the aforementioned criteria. For the reasons discussed below. we lind that the exhibits do not 
meet any of the evidentiary categories. 
Evidence that the alien has perfiJrmed. and 1vill Jmfimn. services as u lead or 
slurring participant in productions or events which have a distinguished repulation 
as evidenced by critical reviews. advertisements. publicity releases. publications 
contracts. or endorsements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(l). 
The Petitioner submitted the Beneficiary's resume, position description, production staff 
identification badges, photographs of her working at music events. compact disc 
covers listing her as a road manager , and promotional flyers and posters relating to music 
performances she supported. The Director discussed this evidence and determined that it was not 
sut1icient to demonstrate that Beneficiary has performed, and will perform. services as a lead or 
starring participant in productions or events which have a distinguished reputation. ln its appeal 
brief. the Petitioner does not contest the Director's analysis of the aforementioned documentation. 
Rather , the Petitioner points to additional evidence it provides for this criterion. 
The appellate submission includes two letters from the assistant manager of to the 
U.S. Embassy in Venezuela requesting 0-2 nonimmigrant visas for 33 support staff in 2014 and 24 
support statl in 2010. These letters list the Beneficiary among the music duo's numerous support 
staff: but they do not identify her position or indicate that she will provide services as a lead or 
starring participant. While the aforementioned letters note that earned 
nominations (2014) and a nomination (2010), and that the duo 
and its support statT planned to attend those ceremonies. the evidence is not sufficient to show that 
the Beneficiary performed as a lead or starring participant at those music events. 
The record also contains an undated letter from to the lJ .S. Embassy 
requesting "the expedition ofthe tourist visa for [the Beneficiary] ... for the evaluation ofthe events 
and recording to be realize[d] in Puerto Rico with 2 This letter does not state that 
the Beneficiary would provide services as a lead or starring participant. or list the specific music 
productions or events she evaluated. Nor is there documentary evidence of the productions or 
events' distinguished reputations as demonstrated by critical rcvie\vs, advertisements, puhlicity 
releases, publications contracts, or endorsements. 
Furthermore, in addition to her past positions , 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 a letter from the Petitioner stating that the Beneficiary will serve as 
assistant artist for its productions '·for the next three 
years." While this letter lists the responsibilities 
2 
The appellate submission includes a copy of the Beneticiary's 2008 ''81 /82" nonimmigrant visa, to which this letter 
appears to relate. The record does not indicate the relationship, if any, between and the 
petitioning entity. 
4 
.
Matter ofA-M-. Inc. 
associated with the Beneficiary's position, it does not identify specific upcoming productions or 
events in which she will participate. As the record does not document future productions or events 
or demonstrate that they have a distinguished reputation as shown by critical reviews, 
advertisements. publicity releases. publications contracts. or endorsements. the Petitioner has not 
established that the Beneficiary satisfies the requirements of this evidentiary criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has achieved national or international recoKnition .fiJr 
achievements evidenced hy critical revieH·s or other published materials by or ahout the 
individual in major neH·spapers, trade journals. maKa:::ines. or other publications. 
8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(2). 
The Director determined that the record did not include critical reviews or other published materials 
by or about the Beneficiary in major newspapers , trade journals. magazines. or other publications. On 
appeal. the Petitioner does not point to specific published material that satisfies the plain language 
requirements of this criterion. Rather, the Petitioner references compact disc (CD) 
covers that list the Beneficiary among multiple support statl and it contends that this music duo's 
nominations meet this criterion. CD covers and 
nominations do not constitute critical reviews or other published materials by or about the 
Beneficiary in major publications. Accordingly . this criterion has not been satisfied. 
Evidence that the alien has perj(mned. and will perf(mn. in a lead starring. or critical 
role .fhr mxani:::ations and establishments that have a distinKuished reputalion 
evidenced by articles in fle'W!lpapers. !rude journals. publications, or Jestimonials. 
8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(3). 
The Director found that the evidence did not establish that the Beneficiary has performed, and will 
perform. in a lead, statTing, or critical role tor organizations and establishments that have a 
distinguished reputation. In its appeal brie[ the Petitioner does not contest the Director's analysis t<.H 
this criterion or ofter additional arguments to overcome her determination on this issue. and we 
agree with her findings. 
The Petitioner offers an October 2016 letter from manager of (a 
Venezuelan singer), attesting that he has known the Beneficiary tor more than nine years. 
states that the Beneficiary is serious. responsible, and displays good moral character. In 
addition. the Petitioner submits a letter from assistant manager of 
asserting that the Beneficiary provided ··professional extraordinary services as Road Manager" hom 
April 2009 to April 2014. The aforementioned letters from and however. do 
not sutliciently explain how the Beneficiary has performed, and will perform. in a lead. staning. or 
critical role for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
The record includes an October 2016 letter from the Petitioner's General Manager. 
indicating that the Beneficiary has been working "as a personal assistant to the 
for his concert tours from 2012 to present. describes the Beneficiary as 
.
Matter of A-M-. Inc. 
diligent, dedicated, trustworth y, proactive. efficient punctual. organized, and attentive to detail. She 
further states that her company is ·'grateful to have her in our team:· but she does not discuss hmv 
the Beneficiary's position as an assistant artist constituted a leading. starring, or critical role tor the 
company as a whole. Furthem1ore, the record does not establish the petitioning organization's 
distinguished reputation . 
Based on the foregoing , the Petitioner has not submitted evidence that the Benefici ary has held a 
lead, starring, or critical role with respect to an organization or establishment that has a distinguished 
reputation. ln addition, the record doe s not demonstrate that she will prospectively serve as such a 
participant for the Petitioner. July 2017 letter indicates that the Beneficiary's 
prospective assistant artist respons ibilities involve "helpin g the artist in the execution and realization 
of his job'' and includ es a detailed listing of the Beneficiary ' s administrative, planning . 
communication. schedulin g, travel preparation. pre-show . and show-time duties. The Petition er has 
not provided. however. inform ation that would elucidate where her proposed position ralls in the 
overa ll hierarchy of its organization or demonstrate her prop osed impact on the organization. 
Finally, while latest letter includes inform ation about and his reco rding 
achievements, the eviden ce is not sufficient to demon strate that the petitioning organization has a 
distinguished reputation. For these reasons , the record does not establish that the Benetici ary meets 
this criterion. 
Evidence that the a lien has a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed 
successes as evidenced by such indica/or.~· as Iitle. rating standinK in !he .field. hox 
office receipts. molhm piclure or television rating\·. and other occupational 
acMevements reported in trade journals. major new.\papers. or olher puh/ications . 
8 C.F.R. * 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(..J). 
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 Benefici ary's record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes. As 
evidence for this crit erion , the Petitioner otlers an post from thankin g his 
"team'' for an excellent show. This evidence does not demon strate the Beneficiar y's record of m ~j or 
commercial or critically acclaimed successes, nor does the record contain other docum entation 
satisfying the plain langua ge requirement s of this criterion . Acco rdingl y. the Petition er has not 
establi shed that the Benetici ary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the a lien has received significant recoKnition for achievemenls .fi·01n 
organizations. critics, govern ment agencies . or other recoKnized experts in !he field 
in which the alien is engage d Such testimonials must he in a fhrm which clearly 
indicates the author's authority. expertise. and knowledKe of the alien ·s 
achievements . 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(8)(5). 
As evidence under this criteri on, the Petitioner provided various recommendation letter s. The 
Director considered the letters and concluded that , although they discussed the Benefi ciary's skill s 
.
Mafter (?f A-M-. Inc. 
and knowledge, they were insut1icient to establish that her work has received significant recognition 
for achievements in the field. 
The Petitioner resubmits the recommendation letters on appeal. 3 For example. 
manager of recording artist tor , states that he has kno"vn the Beneficiary 
"while working as a Road Manager and Assistant Artist in many music shows for longer than twelve 
(12) years," and that the Beneficiary demonstrates good moral character, strong values, honesty, 
integrity, and high standards of conduct in her work. In addition, a musician and chief 
executive ofticer (CEO} of a concert production company. asserts that the 
Beneficiary "knows what artists needs [sic] in all situations during all the productions and 
performance[s]." further states that the Beneficiary "has helped to organize and produce 
multiple famous artist car[e]ers and concert management success.'· The record also includes a letter 
from stating that the Beneficiary's knowledge has helped business for the 
team of and generated positive worldwide exposure tor that artist. explains 
that the Beneficiary handled travel and hotel arrangements, ensuring successful 
logistics. security, transportation. and lodging. He further notes that the Beneficiary represented the 
artist at public events, coordinated media obligations. and maintained full confidentiality regarding 
private matters. Additionally, CEO of , describes the 
Beneficiary as a team worker. a great road manager and assistant. and a production team difference 
maker. While the aforementioned references discuss the Beneficiary's knowledge, resourcefulness. 
and personal qualities. they do not explain how she has received significant recognition in the field 
tor her artistic and road management work, nor do the letters themselves constitute such recognition. 
Furthcm1ore. while the record includes letters from the founder and president of Produccioncs Pina 
indicating that the Beneficiary was awarded the · · prize on three different occasions. as 
noted 
above, the Petitioner has not resolved inconsistencies within the letters. Regardless. the record 
does not include supporting evidence demonstrating the significance of the aforementioned prizes. 
Upon review of all of the letters, we concur with the Director's determination that the Petitioner has 
not established that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion. The authors do not attest to the 
Beneficiary's level of recognition, nor do they explain in factual terms her recognized achievements 
in the field. The issue for this regulatory criterion is whether the Beneficiary has received significant 
recognition tor 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. 
Evidence that the alien has either commanded a high sa/my or will command a high 
salary or other substantial remuneration.f(Jr services in relation to others in the field. as 
evidenced hy comracls or other reliable evidence. 8 C.F .R. § 214.2( o )(3 )(iv)(B )(6). 
3 
We discuss only a sampling of these letters, but have reviewed and considered each one. 
7 
.
Maller of A-M-. Inc. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner had not demonstrated the Beneficiary" s high salary or other 
substantial remuneration for services in relation to others in the field. With respect to the Beneficiary's 
compensation, the Petitioner offers a contract stating that she will receive $28,000 yearly plus bonuses 
and extra payments. 4 The appellate submission also includes a bank reference, account 
confirmation, and customer registration form listing no balances or transactions. In addition. the 
Petitioner provides the Beneficiary's Venezuelan tax registry information form and three certifications 
from the Integrated National Service of Customs and Tax Administration indicating that the agency 
received her income tax returns tor 2013,2015, and 2016. The aforementioned f(1rm and certifications. 
however, do not show the Beneficiary's earnings. 
Assuming that the Beneficiary's compensation will be $28.000 per year as stated in the contract. the 
record does not demonstrate that this salary is considered high in relation to others in the field. The 
Petitioner does not offer salary statistics or other documentation as bases tor comparison showing 
that the Beneficiary commands a high salary relative to other assistant artists or road managers. The 
Petitioner has not established therefore that the Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
C. U.S. Employer Versus U.S. Agent 
The Director found that the record contained inconsistent information as to whether the Petitioner was 
filing as an agent or the Beneficiary's actual employer. The appellate submission includes a July 2017 
'"Contract Agreement" stating that the Beneficiary will ·'be represented by," and ··will complete 
ARTISTIC work tor,'' the petitioning organization. The "Compensation" section of the contract 
identifies the Petitioner "as Employer of the [B Jeneficiary"' and the ·'only employer that will pay"' her. 
As this evidence sutliciently demonstrates that the Petitioner is an agent pert<.1m1ing the function of an 
employer as described under 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(E)(l). the Director's finding on this issue is 
withdrawn. 5 
D. Events or Activities 
The Director determined that the event calendar otlered by the Petitioner was not sufficient to meet the 
requirements ofthe regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). The record includes monthly calendar 
printouts from December 2016 until September 2017. These monthly calendars bear a title of''fThe 
Beneficiary]. and list various 
cities and countries, but they do not sufficiently identify her events or activities. The Director stated 
that the Beneficiary's role was unclear from the event calendars and that this documentation did not 
show that work would be available to her "for the entire requested validity period.'' On appeal, the 
Petitioner does not contest the Director's finding on this issue or offer a sufficient itinerary tor the 
Beneficiary's upcoming events or activities as required under 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). 
Accordingly, we affirm the Director's determination regarding this issue. 
4 
The contract does not specify the amounts or frequency of these bonuses and extra payments. 
5 
As required by the regulation. the record includes a contractual agreement between the Petitioner and the Beneficiary 
which specifies the wage offered and the other terms and conditions of her employment. 
Matter of A-M-. Inc. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The record does not contain evidence of the Beneficiary"s nomination for or receipt of a significant 
national or international award or prize. or at least three of six listed categories of documents. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(A)-(B). In addition, the Petitioner has not offered a sufficient itinerary for 
the Beneficiary's events or activities during the requested validity period. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). Accordingly. the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary is eligible for 
the 0-1 visa classification as a foreign national with extraordinary ability in the arts. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofA-M-. lnc .• ID# 859944 (AAO Feb. 15. 2018) 
9