EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2017Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
DEC192017_03B2203
JudgingMetExhibitionsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A curator and historian of art sought EB-1A classification. The petitioner claimed six criteria but met only one (judging). The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish at least three initial criteria 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
- Judging · Beneficiary evaluated exhibitions and selected artists to mentor and exhibit.
What was missing
- Exhibitions · Record lacks sufficient details about gallery and attributable artistic work.
- Leading or critical role · Future expectation of role does not establish past critical role performance.
- Membership · Petitioner did not establish membership in qualifying associations in the field.
- Original contributions · Certificate and artwork donations do not demonstrate major significance in field.
- Scholarly articles · No evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications.
- Final merits · Failed to satisfy three criteria; final merits analysis not required.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Beneficiary evaluated exhibitions and selected artists to mentor and exhibit. |
 Exhibitions | Not met | Record lacks sufficient details about gallery and attributable artistic work. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Future expectation of role does not establish past critical role performance. |
 Membership | Not met | Petitioner did not establish membership in qualifying associations in the field. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Certificate and artwork donations do not demonstrate major significance in field. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | No evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications. |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed to satisfy three criteria; final merits analysis not required. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.