EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
DEC212005_02B2203
AwardsNot metCommercial successNot metExhibitionsNot metJudgingNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Oil painter from China sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on exhibition awards, publication, judging role, and sales. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards and exhibitions lacked sustained national acclaim, documentation was deficient, and evidence did not show sustained recognition at the very top of the field.
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
- Awards · Awards from 1994 and 1998 do not demonstrate sustained acclaim when petition filed years later
- Commercial success · No evidence of prices comparable to top oil painters in China or United States
- Exhibitions · Work exhibition is routine in occupation; no sustained acclaim demonstrated beyond early national exhibitions
- Judging · Limited judging role at provincial level does not reflect sustained national or international acclaim
- Original contributions · No evidence book was critically acclaimed or influenced artists and scholars in the field
- Published material · Book inclusion and newspaper report lack proper documentation and do not establish national acclaim
- Final merits · Evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner at field top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Awards from 1994 and 1998 do not demonstrate sustained acclaim when petition filed years later |
 Commercial success | Not met | No evidence of prices comparable to top oil painters in China or United States |
 Exhibitions | Not met | Work exhibition is routine in occupation; no sustained acclaim demonstrated beyond early national exhibitions |
 Judging | Not met | Limited judging role at provincial level does not reflect sustained national or international acclaim |
 Original contributions | Not met | No evidence book was critically acclaimed or influenced artists and scholars in the field |
 Published material | Not met | Book inclusion and newspaper report lack proper documentation and do not establish national acclaim |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner at field top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.