EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided June 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN252021_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metJudgingClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Fashion designer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only one of ten criteria (exhibitions). AAO affirmed denial: petitioner did not establish three required criteria and failed to show sustained national or international acclaim or position among top of 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's work displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases satisfied criterion
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award established
- Membership · Union membership claimed but insufficient documentation of selection criteria or that membership required outstanding achievement
- Published material · Articles submitted did not mention petitioner; articles about others do not demonstrate petitioner's extraordinary ability
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Petitioner's work displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases satisfied criterion |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award established |
 Membership | Not met | Union membership claimed but insufficient documentation of selection criteria or that membership required outstanding achievement |
 Published material | Not met | Articles submitted did not mention petitioner; articles about others do not demonstrate petitioner's extraordinary ability |
 Judging | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed on appeal but petitioner did not explain why criterion did not apply to fashion design occupation |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed on appeal but not adequately analyzed; petitioner asserted six criteria met but Director found only one |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.