Outcome: Dismissed
JUL142021_02B2203
Our summary
A singer claimed extraordinary ability through seven criteria: awards, published material, judging, original contributions, displays, and two unspecified criteria. She met judging and display criteria but fell short of the required three minimum. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim 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
- Exhibitions · Petitioner satisfied artistic display criterion
- Judging · Director determined petitioner met judging criterion
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award indicated or established
- Published material · Articles did not appear in qualifying publications
- Final merits · Record does not show sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Petitioner satisfied artistic display criterion | |
| Met | Director determined petitioner met judging criterion | |
| Not met | No major internationally recognized award indicated or established | |
| Not met | Articles did not appear in qualifying publications | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but abandoned on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but abandoned on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed | |
| Not met | Record does not show sustained national or international acclaim at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
