EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided May 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAY282025_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetJudgingMetAwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An embossing artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The service center found two criteria met: judging and display. On appeal, the petitioner claimed four additional criteria but the AAO rejected awards, published materials, and original contributions for lack of specificity and documentation. With only two criteria met, the appeal was dismissed.
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 · Service center determination met; not disturbed on appeal.
- Judging · Service center determination met; not disturbed on appeal.
What was missing
- Awards · Award lacked documentation of excellence basis, criteria used, and national or international recognition standard.
- Original contributions · Support letters praising artistic style lacked specifics demonstrating major significance of contributions in field.
- Published material · Articles missing required title or author; publications not shown as professional or major media with evidence.
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; petitioner not shown to be among small percentage at top of embossing art field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Service center determination met; not disturbed on appeal. |
 Judging | Met | Service center determination met; not disturbed on appeal. |
 Awards | Not met | Award lacked documentation of excellence basis, criteria used, and national or international recognition standard. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Support letters praising artistic style lacked specifics demonstrating major significance of contributions in field. |
 Published material | Not met | Articles missing required title or author; publications not shown as professional or major media with evidence. |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; petitioner not shown to be among small percentage at top of embossing art field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.