EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2006Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Dec182006_01B2203
AwardsNot metExhibitionsNot metHigh salaryNot metMembershipNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-represented artist claims extraordinary ability through awards, membership, exhibitions, and salary. AAO found awards provincial only, membership inadequate, exhibitions insufficient, and salary unexceptional. Record did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status since entering United States in 1999.
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 reflected provincial rather than national or international recognition; insufficient documentation of award criteria and stature
- Exhibitions · Petitioner did not demonstrate regular participation in exclusive venues devoted to displaying artwork alone
- High salary · No evidence showing compensation significantly higher than others in field
- Membership · Membership based on employment or activity in field does not constitute outstanding achievement
- Final merits · Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in small percentage at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Awards reflected provincial rather than national or international recognition; insufficient documentation of award criteria and stature |
 Exhibitions | Not met | Petitioner did not demonstrate regular participation in exclusive venues devoted to displaying artwork alone |
 High salary | Not met | No evidence showing compensation significantly higher than others in field |
 Membership | Not met | Membership based on employment or activity in field does not constitute outstanding achievement |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in small percentage at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.