Outcome: Dismissed
MAY052025_01B2203
Our summary
Video game developer petitioned for senior animator as extraordinary ability in arts. SCOPS found beneficiary met one criterion (judging); AAO dismissed, holding beneficiary met only judging criterion and failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or elite status.
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
- Judging · SCOPS found beneficiary met criterion for judging; AAO agrees record supports this
What was missing
- Awards · Team awards to games not evidence beneficiary received award in own right; credits named other individuals as winners
- Original contributions · Support letters from coworkers only; contributions not recognized beyond professional circle; significance not demonstrated
- Final merits · Beneficiary's skills valued by employers and colleagues on acclaimed games but lacks sustained national or international acclaim or place at very top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | SCOPS found beneficiary met criterion for judging; AAO agrees record supports this | |
| Not met | Team awards to games not evidence beneficiary received award in own right; credits named other individuals as winners | |
| Not met | Support letters from coworkers only; contributions not recognized beyond professional circle; significance not demonstrated | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not address SCOPS determination | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Not met | Beneficiary's skills valued by employers and colleagues on acclaimed games but lacks sustained national or international acclaim or place at very top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
