EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided October 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT052020_06B2203
ExhibitionsMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A miniature painter specializing in traditional art sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed because he satisfied only one of ten criteria: artistic display. Other claimed criteria failed due to insufficient evidence of recognition, and the record did not demonstrate career-level acclaim or top-tier standing in the field.
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 determined artistic display criterion was satisfied.
What was missing
- Awards · National or international recognition of prizes not established; awards lacked significant public or professional notice.
- Membership · Position with city administration did not constitute membership in association requiring outstanding achievements by recognized experts.
- Original contributions · Reviving or preserving existing traditional art form not sufficient; contributions lacked major significance in field.
- Published material · Magazine and newspaper articles did not reference petitioner; YouTube video had minimal views and postdated petition filing.
- Final merits · Petitioner satisfied only one criterion; record does not support sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier standing.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | Director determined artistic display criterion was satisfied. |
 Awards | Not met | National or international recognition of prizes not established; awards lacked significant public or professional notice. |
 Membership | Not met | Position with city administration did not constitute membership in association requiring outstanding achievements by recognized experts. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Reviving or preserving existing traditional art form not sufficient; contributions lacked major significance in field. |
 Published material | Not met | Magazine and newspaper articles did not reference petitioner; YouTube video had minimal views and postdated petition filing. |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in detail; record does not support criterion under regulatory requirements. |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner satisfied only one criterion; record does not support sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier standing. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.