Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AArts, design, architectureEmployerDecided March 2021Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR012021_03B2203

Published materialMetOriginal contributionsNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A visual effects artist employed at an animation studio claimed six criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found published materials criterion met but original contributions not met due to vague letters. At final merits, the decision held the petitioner lacked sustained acclaim despite being talented and promising, therefore not meeting the extraordinary ability standard.

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

  • Published material · Articles in Indonesian daily newspapers Kompas and Jakarta Post satisfied criterion elements

What was missing

  • Original contributions · Recommendation letters lacked specifics on how contributions significantly impacted field
  • Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top small percentage

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
Published materialMetArticles in Indonesian daily newspapers Kompas and Jakarta Post satisfied criterion elements
Original contributionsNot metRecommendation letters lacked specifics on how contributions significantly impacted field
Commercial successClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed at filing but no substantive evidence provided beyond recommendation letters
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
Final meritsNot metRecord does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top small percentage

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.