EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided July 2024Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL242024_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetPublished materialMetAwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A visual artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming six criteria. The AAO found two criteria met (published material and display of work) but this falls short of the three minimum required. The remaining claimed criteria were either rejected or abandoned, and the overall record did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim or placement among the very top of the 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 · Decision agreed with Director that petitioner satisfied display of work in field criterion
- Published material · Featured in several articles published in major media; decision withdrew Director's denial on this criterion
What was missing
- Awards · Petitioner did not receive major internationally recognized award or lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence
- Original contributions · Publications alone insufficient; no evidence of marked impact or major significance in the field as a whole
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; record does not demonstrate petitioner is among upper echelon or has sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Decision agreed with Director that petitioner satisfied display of work in field criterion |
 Published material | Met | Featured in several articles published in major media; decision withdrew Director's denial on this criterion |
 Awards | Not met | Petitioner did not receive major internationally recognized award or lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence |
 Original contributions | Not met | Publications alone insufficient; no evidence of marked impact or major significance in the field as a whole |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Abandoned on appeal; petitioner did not pursue initial claim or contest Director's conclusions |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; decision did not reach this criterion after finding only two criteria met |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; record does not demonstrate petitioner is among upper echelon or has sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.