Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
case remandedArts20233 criteria counted

Arts (Vocal Coach and Singer)

AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A talent visa

Updated: Author: Alina Kanametova

This is a real, anonymized AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A immigrant visa, in the field of Arts (Vocal Coach and Singer) (Arts), 2023. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 3 were counted: Judging, Exhibitions, Leading role; not counted: Awards, Published material about you, Commercial success.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the case went back to the officer for another look, not a final decision. Of the 6 EB-1A criteria claimed, 3 were counted. It never reached the final-merits stage: that requires at least 3 counted criteria.

EB-1A criteria in this case

Why these criteria usually go uncounted

The through-line of the appeals base: in 81% of decisions the AAO names the same problem - assertions not backed by sufficient evidence - and 45% of cases are lost at the final-merits totality assessment. Below is how each criterion not counted here fares across the whole base.

Awards

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 677 cases and counted in 129 (19%). Typical AAO objection: "Awards not nationally/internationally recognized". Counted when the award shows national/international reach: rules, jury makeup, scale of the competition.

Published material about you

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 793 cases and counted in 286 (36%). Typical AAO objections: "Outlet not shown to be major media"; "Published material not ABOUT the person". Counts coverage specifically ABOUT YOU in independent major or trade outlets, with publication details.

Commercial success

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 81 cases and counted in 9 (11%). Counts commercial success in the performing arts with numbers: box office, sales, charts.

The Arts field in the database: 343 appeals

Outcomes in this field: 12 sustained, 52 remanded, 279 dismissed. How the AAO ruled in this field on the criteria argued in this case:

CriterionIn this caseCounted in the fieldHow objections were answered
Awardsnot counted44 of 236 (19%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Published material about younot counted90 of 242 (37%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Judgingcounted117 of 162 (72%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Exhibitionscounted130 of 160 (81%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)
Leading rolecounted45 of 161 (28%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Commercial successnot counted6 of 53 (11%)-

Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Arts appeals.

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The initial denial was based on failing to meet the evidentiary requirements (either a one-time achievement or at least three criteria). While the petitioner met three criteria upon review, a final merits determination is still required to assess sustained national or international acclaim and whether the petitioner is among the very top of their field.

The quote summarizes a fragment of the decision; the table above reflects the FINAL status of the criteria across all stages of the case (including ones conceded before the appeal), so the wording may not match one-to-one.

Full AAO decision of June 29, 2023 (PDF, uscis.gov)AAO decisions archive on uscis.gov

FAQ on this case

Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?
Criteria claimed: 6, counted: 3 (Judging, Exhibitions, Leading role); not counted: Awards, Published material about you, Commercial success.
How did this appeal end?
The case was remanded: the AAO withdrew the decision and sent it back to the officer - not a final approval, but not a final denial either.
Did the case reach the final-merits stage?
No - the case did not reach final merits: fewer than the required 3 criteria were counted.

The criteria not counted here - typical objections and how to respond:

Related

Similar appeals

Same outcome in other fields

This is an anonymized public decision of the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), shown for reference. Not legal advice and not a guarantee of your own outcome; every case is decided on its own facts.