Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

DEC192005_18B2203

MembershipNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Folk artist petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. Petitioner failed to submit evidence addressing regulatory criteria and did not respond adequately to director's request for documentation. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for lack of substantive arguments and insufficient evidence.

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

  • Membership · Petitioner failed to submit required evidence of membership criteria in response to director's request for documentation
  • Final merits · Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of ten criteria; no sustained national or international acclaim established

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
MembershipNot metPetitioner failed to submit required evidence of membership criteria in response to director's request for documentation
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Commercial successClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; no evidence addressed any of ten criteria
Final meritsNot metPetitioner failed to satisfy at least three of ten criteria; no sustained national or international acclaim established

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.