Outcome: Dismissed
OCT082019_01B2203
Our summary
A journalist and patron of the arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but failed to identify a single field encompassing her journalism, stage production, and arts organizing activities. The AAO rejected her claims under judging, leading or critical role, and membership criteria, finding insufficient or inconsistent evidence. 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.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Judging · Evidence consists of inconsistent letters and article of unknown origin; insufficient documentation
- Leading or critical role · Employment as journalist among 1600 others not automatically leading or critical role
- Membership · No evidence that association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts
- Final merits · Petitioner did not establish extraordinary ability; final merits determination not required
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Evidence consists of inconsistent letters and article of unknown origin; insufficient documentation | |
| Not met | Employment as journalist among 1600 others not automatically leading or critical role | |
| Not met | No evidence that association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | No major internationally recognized award claimed or established | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or mentioned in decision | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not establish extraordinary ability; final merits determination not required |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
