Tattoo Art/Painting
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 Tattoo Art/Painting (Arts), 2022. The appeal was appeal sustained, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner met the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 7 were counted: Awards, Membership, Published material about you, Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions, Leading role.
What this case shows
Bottom line: the appeal was sustained - a rare outcome in the appeals base. Of the 7 EB-1A criteria claimed, 7 were counted. The petitioner also passed the final-merits totality assessment - both the criteria and the overall extraordinary-ability standard.
EB-1A criteria in this case
- Awardscounted
- Membershipcounted
- Published material about youcounted
- Judgingcounted
- Original contributioncounted
- Scholarly authorshipnot claimed
- Exhibitionscounted
- Leading rolecounted
- High remunerationnot claimed
- Commercial successnot claimed
- Comparable evidencenot claimed
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:
| Criterion | In this case | Counted in the field | How objections were answered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Awards | counted | 44 of 236 (19%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Membership | counted | 15 of 126 (12%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Published material about you | counted | 90 of 242 (37%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Judging | counted | 117 of 162 (72%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Original contribution | counted | 14 of 119 (12%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Exhibitions | counted | 130 of 160 (81%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Leading role | counted | 45 of 161 (28%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Arts appeals.
How to read this case
No claimed criterion here is marked "not counted", and the petitioner passed the final-merits totality assessment - one of the rare winning outcomes in the base (AAO appeals are sustained in roughly 3% of cases). Study which criteria were counted and compare them with your own evidence set.
From the AAO decision (source, EN)
The initial denial was based on a finding that the petitioner demonstrated 'bursts of professional popularity and success' rather than sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found that the petitioner *did* demonstrate sustained acclaim based on media exposure, Instagram followers, and judging at a major tattoo convention.
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 September 19, 2022 (PDF, uscis.gov)AAO decisions archive on uscis.gov
FAQ on this case
- Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?
- Criteria claimed: 7, counted: 7 (Awards, Membership, Published material about you, Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions, Leading role).
- How did this appeal end?
- The appeal was sustained - the denial was overturned in the petitioner's favor. A rare outcome: about 3% of our base.
- Did the case reach the final-merits stage?
- Yes, and on the totality assessment the petitioner met the extraordinary-ability standard.