Outcome: Dismissed
AUG152018_01B2203
Our summary
A filmmaker and film producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed to meet three criteria: published material, original contributions, and exhibitions. The AAO found published material and exhibitions met but rejected original contributions as lacking demonstration of major significance. The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the required sustained national or international acclaim.
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 · Decision states petitioner established this criterion regarding display of work
- Published material · Director found petitioner met this criterion; articles and television coverage in major media
What was missing
- Original contributions · Reference letters praise work but do not demonstrate major significance to the field
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Decision states petitioner established this criterion regarding display of work | |
| Met | Director found petitioner met this criterion; articles and television coverage in major media | |
| Not met | Reference letters praise work but do not demonstrate major significance to the field | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner had no major internationally recognized award | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
