Outcome: Dismissed
JUL012021_01B2203
Our summary
A film and television director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found she satisfied only the judging criterion and concluded she had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or status among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
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 · Petitioner served on judging panels for film festivals and awards competitions.
What was missing
- Awards · Nominations and awards submitted do not satisfy requirement for nationally or internationally recognized prizes.
- Membership · Petitioner claimed but did not provide evidence of association membership requiring outstanding achievements.
- Final merits · Petitioner progressing toward top of field, not demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim at very top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Petitioner served on judging panels for film festivals and awards competitions. | |
| Not met | Nominations and awards submitted do not satisfy requirement for nationally or internationally recognized prizes. | |
| Not met | Petitioner claimed but did not provide evidence of association membership requiring outstanding achievements. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision. | |
| Not met | Petitioner progressing toward top of field, not demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim at very top. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
