EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2006Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Apr142006_03B2203
Commercial successNot metExhibitionsNot metHigh salaryNot metJudgingNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-represented Georgian folk music performer and teacher claims extraordinary ability but failed to specify which criteria met. AAO found no awards evidence, inadequate published material, insufficient judging, weak original contributions, no exclusive exhibitions, unexceptional salary, and no commercial success documentation. Overall evidence showed talent but not sustained top-tier acclaim.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Commercial success · Evidence of discs and sales numbers not submitted
- Exhibitions · Concert does not constitute exclusive showcase of folk music contemplated by regulation
- High salary · Income not established as significantly high for services in field
- Judging · Music teaching position does not constitute judging work of others; insufficient specifics on consulting role
- Original contributions · Expert opinions cannot form cornerstone of claim; individual with sustained acclaim should produce unsolicited materials
- Published material · No primary evidence of reviews; reviews not shown to mention petitioner by name; publications not established as major media
- Final merits · Petitioner shows talent but evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Commercial success | Not met | Evidence of discs and sales numbers not submitted |
 Exhibitions | Not met | Concert does not constitute exclusive showcase of folk music contemplated by regulation |
 High salary | Not met | Income not established as significantly high for services in field |
 Judging | Not met | Music teaching position does not constitute judging work of others; insufficient specifics on consulting role |
 Original contributions | Not met | Expert opinions cannot form cornerstone of claim; individual with sustained acclaim should produce unsolicited materials |
 Published material | Not met | No primary evidence of reviews; reviews not shown to mention petitioner by name; publications not established as major media |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner shows talent but evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.