dismissed O-1B Case: Stage Management

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: JAN. II. 2018 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a production company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a stage 
manager. It seeks to classifY him 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 IOI(a)(l5)(0)(i), 8 U.S.C. 
§ IIOI(a)(IS)(O)(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 filing as an 
agent or the Beneficiary's actual employer. Lastly, the Director found that the event calendar offered by 
the Petitioner was not sufficient to meet the requirements of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2( 0 )(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 101 (a)(IS)(O)(i) of the Act establishes 0-1 classification for an individual who 
has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business. or athletics which has been 
demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim, whose achievements have been recognized 
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 ''02/12/2012" to "'02/12/2023'" (II years). In its statement accompanying the 
appeal, the Petitioner states that ·'the correct terrn of the contract is for 3 years." 
Matter of A-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 level of 
achievement in the field of arts evidenced by a degree of skill and recognition substantially above that 
ordinarily encountered to the extent that a person described as prominent is renowned, leading, or well­
known in the field of arts." 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii). 
Next, DHS regulations set forth the 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 of, "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 does not, in and of itselt: 
establish eligibility for 0-1 classification. See 59 Fed. Reg. 41818, 41820 (Aug. 15, 1994 ). In Matter 
ofChawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010), we held that, "truth is to be determined not by the 
quantity of evidence alone but by its quality." That decision explains that, pursuant to the 
preponderance of the evidence standard, we "must examine each piece of evidence for relevance. 
probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of the evidence. 
to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true." !d. Accordingly, where a petitioner 
provides the requisite initial evidence, we then determine whether the record. viewed in its totality. 
shows sustained national or international acclaim such that the individual is prominent in the field of 
endeavor. 
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 ior the 
events or activities, and a copy of any itinerary for the events or activities. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C). 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Significant National or International Award or Prize 
As noted above, a petitioner may demonstrate that a beneficiary qualities as an individual of 
extraordinary ability in the arts through evidence of his 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 
2 
.
Maller of A-M-. Inc. 
president of 
to receive his ' 
the 
to receive his ' 
in Venezuela indicating that the Beneficiary was awarded the 
prize on three different occasions . A September 2015 letter invites the Beneficiary 
on 
prize "( o ]n the occasion of the of 
2015. Similarly, a January 2016 letter invites the Beneficiary 
prize "[ o ]n the occasion of the 
ofthe "on 2016. Lastly. the July 2016 letter invites 
the Beneficiary to receive his ' prize "[ o]n 
the occasion of the of the · on 2016 (emphasis 
added) . We note that the anniversary number associated with the Beneficiary 's 2016 
· prize is not sequentially consistent with the anniversary number of his earlier 
prizes. A petitioner must resolve inconsistencies in the record with independent , objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies . Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec . 582. 591-592 (BIA 1988). Here. the 
Petitioner has not resolved the inconsistent letters . 
In addition, the Petitioner submits a certified English language translation of a Spanish language 
Gmail sent by an assistant to the manager of the Vene zuelan 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 . 
Furthermore , the original Gmail document in the Spanish language was not included with the 
translation. 
Regardless , the aforementioned Gmail translation 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 demon strate the Beneficiary ' s sustained acc laim 
and recognition of achievements through evidence corresponding to at least three of the six 
regulatory criteria at 8 C.F .R § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B). The Director determined that the Petitioner did 
not satisfy any of those criteria. The Petitioner maintains on appeal that the exhibits satisty all six of 
the aforementioned criteria. For the reasons discussed below. we find that the exhibits do not meet 
any of the evidentiary categories. 
Evidence that the alien has performed. and will pe1:/orm. services as a lead or 
starring participant in productions or events which have a distinguish ed r eputation 
.
Maller of A-M- , Inc. 
as evidenced by critical reviews , advertisements. publicity releases. publications 
contracts. or endorsements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(/). 
The Petitioner submitted the Beneficiary's resume, position description, production staff 
identification badges, photographs of him working at music events, compact disc 
covers listing him as a stage technician, and promotional flyers and posters relating to music 
performances he supported . The Director discussed this evidence and determined that it was not 
sufficient 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. In its appeal 
brief, the Petitioner does not contest the Director 's analysis of the aforementioned docum entatio n. 
Rather , the Petitioner point s to additional evidence it provides for this criterion. 
The appellate submission includes two letters trom the assistant manager of to the 
in Venezuela requesting 0-2 nonimmigrant visas for 33 support staff in 2014 and 24 
support staff in 2010. These letters I ist the Beneficiary among the music numerous support 
staff, but they do not identify his position or indicate that he will provide services as a lead or 
starring participant. While the aforementioned letters note that earned 
nominations (20 14) and nominations (20 1 0), and that the 
and its support staff planned to attend those ceremonies , the evidence is not sutlicient 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 
requesting "the expedition of the tourist visa for [the Beneficiary] ... for the evaluation of the 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 specitic music 
productions or events he evaluated. Nor is there documentary evidence of the productions or events' 
distinguished reputations as demonstrated by critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, 
publications contracts, or endorsements. 
Furthermore, in addition to his past positions , this criterion requires that the Beneficiary "wi ll 
perform" services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events with a distin guished 
reputation. The record includes a letter from the Petitioner stating that the Beneficiary will serve as 
its stage manager of its productions "for the next three years.'' While this letter lists the 
responsibilities associated with the Beneficiary's position , it does not identif y specific upcoming 
productions or events in which he 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 evidentiar y criterion. 
2 The appellate submission includ es a copy of the Beneficiary 's 2008 ''B 1/82'' nonimmi grant visa, to which this letter 
appears to relate. The record does not indicate the relationship , if any, between and the 
petitioning entity. 
4 
.
Matter of A-M-. Inc. 
Evidence that the alien has achieved national or international recoKnition .fiJr 
achievements evidenced by critical reviews or other published materials hy or about the 
individual in major new.~papers. trade journals. magazines. 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 which list the Beneficiary among multiple stage technicians 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 per.fiJrmed. and will perform. in a lead. starring or critical 
role fiJr orKanizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation 
evidenced hy articles in newspapers, trade journals. publications. or testimonials. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(J). 
The Director found that the evidence did not establish that the Beneficiary has performed, and will 
perform, in a lead, starring, or critical role for organizations and establishments that have a 
distinguished reputation. In its appeal brief~ the Petitioner does not contest the Director's analysis for 
this criterion or otlcr additional arguments to overcome her determination on this issue, and \\'C 
agree with her findings. 
The Petitioner offers an October 2016 letter from manager of (a 
Venezuelan singer), attesting that he has known the Beneficiary for more than nine years. 
asserts that the Beneficiary is serious, responsible, and displays good moral character. but 
does not discuss how the Beneficiary has performed, and will perform. in a lead, starring, or critical 
role tor 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 Stage Manager to the Worldwide Artist-
for his concert tours tfom 20 12 to present. describes the Beneficiary as 
diligent, dedicated, proactive, efficient, cooperative, knowledgeable, organized, and attentive to 
detail. She further states that her company is "grateful to have him as part of our team," but she does 
not discuss how his position as stage manager constituted a leading, 
starring. or critical role for the 
company as a whole. Furthermore. the record does not establish the petitioning organization's 
distinguished reputation. 
Based on the foregoing, the Petitioner has not submitted evidence that the Beneficiary has held a 
lead, starring, or critical role with respect to an organization or establishment that has a distinguished 
reputation. In addition. the record does not demonstrate that he will prospectively serve as such a 
c 
.
Maner of A-M- , Inc. 
partiCipant for the Petitioner. July 2017 letter indicates that the Beneficiary's 
prospective stage manager responsibilities involve "helping the artist in execution and realization of 
his job" and includes a detailed listing of the Beneficiary's pre-show, show time, and post-sho\v 
duties. The Petitioner has not provided, however , information that would elucidate where his 
proposed position falls in the overall hierarchy of its organization or demonstrate his proposed 
impact on the organization . Finally, while latest letter includes information about 
and his recording achievements. she has not offered sufticient evidence to demonstrate 
that the petitioning organization has a distinguished reputation. For these reasons, the record does 
not establish that the Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence thai the alien has a record of mq;or commercial or critical~v acclaimed 
successes as evidenced by such indicators as title, rating, slanding in the field, hox 
office receipts. motion picture or television ratings. and other occupational 
achievements reported in trade journals, major newspapers. or other publications. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(4). 
The Director determined that the record did not includ e documentati on relevant to this evidentiary 
criterion. On appeal, the Petitioner does not specifically challenge this determination or point to 
indicators of the Beneficiar y's record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes. As 
evidence for this criterion, the Petitioner offers an Instagram post from thanking his 
"team" for an excellent show. This evidence does not demonstrate the Beneficiar y's record of major 
commercial or critically acclaimed successes, nor does the record contain other documentation 
satisfying the plain langua ge requirements of this criterion. The Petitioner has not estab lished 
therefore that the Benefici ary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has received sign!ficanl recogn ition fiJr achievements .fi'om 
organizalions , critics, government agencies. or other recognized experts in !he field 
in which the alien is engaged. Such testimoni als must be in a fiJrm which clearly 
indicates the author 's authority. expertise, and knowledge of' rhe alien's 
achievements. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(5 ). 
As evidence under this criterion , the Petitioner provided various recommendati on letters. The 
Director considered the letters a nd concluded that, although they discusse d the Beneficiary's skills 
and knowledge, they were insufftcient to establish that his work has received significant recognit ion 
for achievements in the field. 
The Petitioner resubmit s the recommendation letters on appeal. 3 For example, 
manager of recording artist for states that he has known the Beneficiary 
"while working as a Stage Manager in many music shows for longer than ten (1 0) years,'' and that 
the Beneficiary demonstr ates good moral character, strong values, honesty. integrity. and high 
standards of conduct in his work. In addition, a musician and chief executive officer 
3 We discuss only a sampling of these letter s, but have reviewed and considered each one. 
.
Maller of A-M- , Inc. 
(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 for that artist. explains that the Beneficiary 
organized the cast and rehearsals , oversaw production responsibilities for each event, and forecasted 
production costs. While the aforementioned references discuss the Beneficiary's knowledge, 
production experience , and personal qualities, they do not explain how he has received significant 
recognition in the field for his stage management work , nor do the letters themselves constitute such 
recognition. 
Furthermore, while the record includes letters from the founder and president of 
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 beyond their own companies and organizations, nor do they 
explain in factual terms his recognized achievements in the field of stage management. 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. 
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. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o )(3 )(iv)(B)(6). 
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 he will receive $28,000 years 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 torm and two certifications 
from the Integrated National Service of Customs and Tax Administration indicating that the agency 
received the Beneficiary's income tax returns for 2015 and 2016. The aforementioned form and 
certifications , however, do not show the Beneficiary's earnings. 
4 The contract does not specify the amounts or frequency of these bonuses and extra payments. 
.
Matter of A-M-. Inc. 
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 for comparison showing 
that the Beneficiary commands a high salary relative to other stage 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 for," the petitioning organization. The "Compensation " section of the contract 
identifies the Petitioner "as Employer of the [B]eneficiary" and the "only employer that will pay·· him. 
As this evidence sufficiently demonstrates that the Petitioner is an agent performing 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 otTered by the Petitioner was not sufficient to meet the 
requirements of the 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 
· and list various 
cities and countries. but they do not mention the Beneficiary or identify his 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 him "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 for 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. 
IlL 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. 
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 his employment. 
Matter of A-M-, Inc. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of A-M-. Inc., ID# 872846 (AAO Jan. II, 20 18) 
9