Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided April 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

APR152025_01B2203

JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

A ballroom dance choreographer claimed five evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability, already meeting two. The AAO upheld denials for awards lacking national or international recognition, membership not judged by recognized experts, and salary not shown high relative to the field. With only two criteria met, the petition was dismissed without final merits review.

Official PDF

Official PDF ↗

Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.

What the AAO accepted

  • Judging · Service Center finding affirmed without disturbance
  • Leading or critical role · Service Center finding affirmed without disturbance

What was missing

  • Awards · Awards were not nationally or internationally recognized; competition openness to international participants does not establish recognition
  • High salary · Wage survey covered only Russia; does not establish salary high relative to choreographers in the field
  • Membership · Dance sport federation membership does not show judging by recognized national or international experts

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetService Center finding affirmed without disturbance
Leading or critical roleMetService Center finding affirmed without disturbance
AwardsNot metAwards were not nationally or internationally recognized; competition openness to international participants does not establish recognition
High salaryNot metWage survey covered only Russia; does not establish salary high relative to choreographers in the field
MembershipNot metDance sport federation membership does not show judging by recognized national or international experts
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedDid not satisfy threshold of three initial evidentiary criteria; final merits analysis not reached

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.