Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2015Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

JAN262015_01B2203

JudgingMetAwardsNot metCommercial successNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Artist and performing arts professional claimed multiple criteria including judging. AAO sustained judging criterion but rejected awards as abandoned, membership without sufficient detail, and commercial success lacking corroboration. Petitioner met only one criterion; failed three-criterion threshold. Appeal dismissed.

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 plain language requirements of judging criterion

What was missing

  • Awards · Petitioner abandoned awards claim; no reference or evidence on appeal for this criterion
  • Commercial success · Unsupported claims of commercial success in performing arts lacked corroborating evidence
  • Leading or critical role · Record did not contain evidence relating to this criterion
  • Membership · Association letter lacked sufficient detail to show membership requires outstanding achievements
  • Published material · Evidence did not show published material from professional publication; not about petitioner
  • Final merits · Failed to establish three regulatory criteria; aggregate evidence insufficient for required expertise level

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetDirector determined petitioner met plain language requirements of judging criterion
AwardsNot metPetitioner abandoned awards claim; no reference or evidence on appeal for this criterion
Commercial successNot metUnsupported claims of commercial success in performing arts lacked corroborating evidence
Leading or critical roleNot metRecord did not contain evidence relating to this criterion
MembershipNot metAssociation letter lacked sufficient detail to show membership requires outstanding achievements
Published materialNot metEvidence did not show published material from professional publication; not about petitioner
Final meritsNot metFailed to establish three regulatory criteria; aggregate evidence insufficient for required expertise level

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.