Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
appeal dismissedEngineering20231 criteria counted

Recording Engineer and Producer

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 Recording Engineer and Producer (Engineering), 2023. The appeal was appeal dismissed, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 1 were counted: Published material about you; not counted: Awards, Membership, Original contribution, Exhibitions, Commercial success.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the EB-1A denial stands. Of the 6 EB-1A criteria claimed, 1 were counted. The criteria were enough to reach final merits, but on the totality of the evidence the petitioner fell short of the extraordinary-ability standard - 3+ criteria alone do not guarantee approval.

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.

Membership

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 496 cases and counted in 58 (12%). Typical AAO objection: "Membership does not require outstanding achievement". Counted when membership requires outstanding achievement judged by experts, not just a fee.

Original contribution

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 642 cases and counted in 105 (16%). Typical AAO objection: "Original contribution: impact not shown". Counted when the contribution’s impact is shown: adoption, citation, use by others.

Exhibitions

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 226 cases and counted in 149 (66%). Counts showing work at artistic exhibitions, with venue, dates and proof of participation.

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 Engineering field in the database: 94 appeals

Outcomes in this field: 1 sustained, 19 remanded, 74 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 counted5 of 40 (13%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Membershipnot counted5 of 34 (15%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)
Published material about youcounted22 of 48 (46%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Original contributionnot counted18 of 67 (27%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Exhibitionsnot counted0 of 5 (0%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)

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

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirement of at least three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Specifically, the submitted evidence did not demonstrate receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes, outstanding achievements required for Academy memberships, or display of work at artistic exhibitions. The petition was ultimately denied for failing to demonstrate 'extraordinary ability'.

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 23, 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: 1 (Published material about you); not counted: Awards, Membership, Original contribution, Exhibitions, Commercial success.
How did this appeal end?
The appeal was dismissed - the denial stands. Most EB-1A AAO appeals end this way (~80% of our base).
Did the case reach the final-merits stage?
Yes, but on the final-merits totality assessment the petitioner fell short - the criteria were only the entry gate.

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.