EB-1AArts, design, architectureEmployerDecided September 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
SEP232020_03B2203
AwardsNot metExhibitionsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A software technology company petitioned for its senior creative designer as an extraordinary ability worker, asserting several evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the awards, original contributions and exhibitions criteria unmet, noting the awards belonged to the employer and letters lacked specifics. The evidence did not show sustained acclaim, so 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
- Awards · Awards went to the employer's booth, and jury selection lacked predetermined criteria; beneficiary's own receipt was not shown.
- Exhibitions · An advertising industry event was not shown to be an artistic exhibition displaying her individual work.
- Original contributions · Recommendation letters lacked specifics showing contributions of major significance in the field.
- Final merits · Significance of her work did not indicate sustained acclaim or place among the small percentage at the top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Awards went to the employer's booth, and jury selection lacked predetermined criteria; beneficiary's own receipt was not shown. |
 Exhibitions | Not met | An advertising industry event was not shown to be an artistic exhibition displaying her individual work. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Recommendation letters lacked specifics showing contributions of major significance in the field. |
 Final merits | Not met | Significance of her work did not indicate 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.