EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided February 2023Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB032023_03B2203
JudgingMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metScholarly articlesNot metLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Fashion designer sought extraordinary ability classification claiming six criteria including awards, membership, and scholarly articles. AAO found only one criterion met (judging) and upheld dismissal. Petitioner failed to establish three-criterion threshold and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A.
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 · Director determined petitioner met judging criterion; AAO agreed with assessment.
What was missing
- Awards · Award lacked evidence of nationally or internationally recognized status and excellence in field.
- Membership · Insufficient primary evidence such as bylaws or constitutions establishing membership requirements.
- Scholarly articles · Evidence did not meet plain language requirements of criterion for scholarly articles.
- Final merits · Failed initial evidentiary step; petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director determined petitioner met judging criterion; AAO agreed with assessment. |
 Awards | Not met | Award lacked evidence of nationally or internationally recognized status and excellence in field. |
 Membership | Not met | Insufficient primary evidence such as bylaws or constitutions establishing membership requirements. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Evidence did not meet plain language requirements of criterion for scholarly articles. |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but unnecessary to reach since petitioner could not numerically meet three criteria requirement. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Petitioner abandoned claims on appeal; not analyzed. |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed initial evidentiary step; petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.