Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsEmployerDecided 2016Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

AUG022016_01B2203

ExhibitionsMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metJudgingNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

A college television station petitioned for a cinematographer and broadcast associate as an artist of extraordinary ability. The appeals office found two criteria satisfied, exhibitions and critical role, and withdrew the director's judging finding. Awards, published material and original contributions failed, so the minimum of three was not reached and the appeal was dismissed.

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

  • Exhibitions · Articles and brochures confirmed films the beneficiary worked on were shown at film festivals.
  • Leading or critical role · Executive director attested the beneficiary's cinematography skills were essential to the organization's broadcasts, and the AAO agreed.

What was missing

  • Awards · No evidence of selection criteria or applicant pools showed the festival awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
  • Judging · Director's favorable finding withdrawn; judging event occurred after filing and was not claimed initially.
  • Original contributions · Letters did not show an original artistic contribution of major significance in the field.
  • Published material · Submitted newspaper article and film reviews were not primarily about the beneficiary.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
ExhibitionsMetArticles and brochures confirmed films the beneficiary worked on were shown at film festivals.
Leading or critical roleMetExecutive director attested the beneficiary's cinematography skills were essential to the organization's broadcasts, and the AAO agreed.
AwardsNot metNo evidence of selection criteria or applicant pools showed the festival awards were nationally or internationally recognized.
JudgingNot metDirector's favorable finding withdrawn; judging event occurred after filing and was not claimed initially.
Original contributionsNot metLetters did not show an original artistic contribution of major significance in the field.
Published materialNot metSubmitted newspaper article and film reviews were not primarily about the beneficiary.
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedAggregate review did not show the level of expertise required, though a formal merits analysis was unnecessary.

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.