EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsIndividualDecided May 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAY272021_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A professional violist sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming four evidentiary criteria. The service center accepted two, and on appeal he argued only an additional awards criterion. The AAO found the prize lacked shown recognition, so three criteria were not met, and it advised the aggregate record also showed insufficient acclaim.
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 · Director found this criterion satisfied and the decision agrees.
- Leading or critical role · Director found this criterion satisfied and the decision agrees.
What was missing
- Awards · Petitioner did not show the prize was nationally or internationally recognized; no media coverage or other proof of recognition.
- Final merits · Advisory review of the whole record found no sustained acclaim or place among the small percentage at the top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Director found this criterion satisfied and the decision agrees. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director found this criterion satisfied and the decision agrees. |
 Awards | Not met | Petitioner did not show the prize was nationally or internationally recognized; no media coverage or other proof of recognition. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not contest the denial on appeal, so the issue was treated as abandoned. |
 Final merits | Not met | Advisory review of the whole record found no sustained acclaim or place among the small percentage at the top. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.