Outcome: Dismissed
Jun052009_02B2203
Our summary
An arts field professional represented by counsel claimed extraordinary ability through published material and judging participation. The AAO rejected published material as lacking complete translations and appearing in insufficient outlets, and found judging role did not evidence top-level sustained acclaim. Aggregate evidence insufficient.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Judging · Participation as judge not evaluated as meeting sustained national or international acclaim
- Published material · Articles incomplete, translations uncertified, and publication scope insufficient for major media
- Final merits · Aggregate evidence does not distinguish petitioner as within small percentage at top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Participation as judge not evaluated as meeting sustained national or international acclaim | |
| Not met | Articles incomplete, translations uncertified, and publication scope insufficient for major media | |
| Not met | Aggregate evidence does not distinguish petitioner as within small percentage at top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
