EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided August 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG262020_02B2203
ExhibitionsMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Jeweler self-employed since 2006 seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed denial because only one of six claimed evidentiary criteria met. Testimonials insufficient; no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of field.
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 · AAO affirmed director's finding that criterion satisfied through artistic exhibitions
What was missing
- Awards · Prizes not nationally or internationally recognized; applicant failed to establish their prominence
- Membership · No credible evidence that association membership required outstanding achievements or judging by recognized experts
- Original contributions · Letters from cultural organizations were not persuasive or credible; no evidence of major significance
- Published material · Materials appeared in small regional publications lacking professional or major media status
- Scholarly articles · Director's finding reversed; materials do not constitute scholarly articles in professional or major publications
- Final merits · Only one of three required criteria met; record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | AAO affirmed director's finding that criterion satisfied through artistic exhibitions |
 Awards | Not met | Prizes not nationally or internationally recognized; applicant failed to establish their prominence |
 Membership | Not met | No credible evidence that association membership required outstanding achievements or judging by recognized experts |
 Original contributions | Not met | Letters from cultural organizations were not persuasive or credible; no evidence of major significance |
 Published material | Not met | Materials appeared in small regional publications lacking professional or major media status |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Director's finding reversed; materials do not constitute scholarly articles in professional or major publications |
 Final merits | Not met | Only one of three required criteria met; record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.