Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
case remandedArts20214 criteria counted

Director of Photography (Film/Television)

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 Director of Photography (Film/Television) (Arts), 2021. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 4 were counted: Membership, Published material about you, Judging, Exhibitions; not counted: Awards, Leading role.

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, 4 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.

Leading role

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 624 cases and counted in 256 (41%). Counted when the organization is known and the role is leading or key, per the org chart and letters.

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)
Membershipcounted15 of 126 (12%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)
Published material about youcounted90 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 rolenot counted45 of 161 (28%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)

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

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The Director failed to adequately weigh all submitted evidence in the final merits determination, particularly regarding the criteria met and the evidence supporting sustained national/international acclaim. The decision lacked sufficient explanation for the denial, hindering meaningful appellate review.

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 March 3, 2021 (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: 4 (Membership, Published material about you, Judging, Exhibitions); not counted: Awards, Leading role.
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.