EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided August 2023Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG222023_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetPublished materialMetAwardsNot metMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed four criteria and the Director found two met. On appeal, the AAO determined that even the two met criteria were insufficient and that the remaining claimed criteria were not established. The petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
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 · Director determined petitioner met criterion relating to artistic display
- Published material · Director determined petitioner met criterion; AAO agreed
What was missing
- Awards · Awards from art competition lacked sufficient documentation of national or international recognition criteria
- Final merits · Evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or elite status in field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Director determined petitioner met criterion relating to artistic display |
 Published material | Met | Director determined petitioner met criterion; AAO agreed |
 Awards | Not met | Awards from art competition lacked sufficient documentation of national or international recognition criteria |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed beyond listing criterion |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed beyond listing criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or elite status in field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.