Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
appeal dismissedArts20222 criteria counted

Writer and Filmmaker

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 Writer and Filmmaker (Arts), 2022. The appeal was appeal dismissed, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 2 were counted: Awards, Published material about you; not counted: Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the EB-1A denial stands. Of the 5 EB-1A criteria claimed, 2 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.

Judging

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 659 cases and counted in 491 (75%). Typical AAO objection: "Judging not actually performed / proven". Counted when the judging actually happened: an invitation plus proof you reviewed others’ work.

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.

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
Awardscounted44 of 236 (19%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Published material about youcounted90 of 242 (37%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Judgingnot counted117 of 162 (72%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Original contributionnot counted14 of 119 (12%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Exhibitionsnot counted130 of 160 (81%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)

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

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The petitioner failed to meet the initial evidence requirements by not satisfying at least three of the criteria outlined in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Specifically, the evidence submitted for judging the work of others and original contributions was deemed insufficient.

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 May 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: 5, counted: 2 (Awards, Published material about you); not counted: Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions.
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?
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.