EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsIndividualDecided October 2023Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT052023_01B2203
High salaryMetExhibitionsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Fashion model with O-1 nonimmigrant status sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding she satisfied only one of ten initial evidentiary criteria; comparable evidence argument without demonstrating inapplicability of specific criteria was rejected; insufficient proof of sustained 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
- High salary · Director found petitioner satisfied high remuneration requirement.
What was missing
- Exhibitions · Director found petitioner did not meet artistic display criterion; not satisfied.
- Leading or critical role · Director found petitioner did not meet leading or critical role criterion.
- Published material · Material submitted partially met criterion but insufficient; does not constitute satisfaction of requirement.
- Final merits · Petitioner satisfied only one criterion; must meet three to proceed to final merits analysis; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Met | Director found petitioner satisfied high remuneration requirement. |
 Exhibitions | Not met | Director found petitioner did not meet artistic display criterion; not satisfied. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Director found petitioner did not meet leading or critical role criterion. |
 Published material | Not met | Material submitted partially met criterion but insufficient; does not constitute satisfaction of requirement. |
 Awards | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for major awards. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for commercial success. |
 Judging | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for judging. |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for membership criterion. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for original contributions. |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not assert eligibility for scholarly articles. |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner satisfied only one criterion; must meet three to proceed to final merits analysis; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.