Outcome: Dismissed
Jun052009_08B2203
Our summary
Petitioner sponsored beneficiary dancer for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Beneficiary claimed eligibility under awards, published material, and judging criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, holding that old awards lack sustained recognition and no qualifying publications or judging roles were established.
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
- Awards · Award shows from 1994 and 1995 too remote to demonstrate sustained acclaim
- Judging · No evidence of judging participation demonstrated
- Published material · Letters from journalist or critic do not constitute published material as required
- Final merits · Beneficiary has not distinguished herself to top tier of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Award shows from 1994 and 1995 too remote to demonstrate sustained acclaim | |
| Not met | No evidence of judging participation demonstrated | |
| Not met | Letters from journalist or critic do not constitute published material as required | |
| 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 | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Not met | Beneficiary has not distinguished herself to top tier of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
