Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued

Actor

Actor · 2024-09-25

Decision Date
2024-09-25
This case is from a USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) appeal decision. Appeal cases represent a subset of petitions and may not reflect typical outcomes.

Framework Evaluation

3 of 3 criteria met
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Met)

The Director decided the Petitioner's evidence met this criterion, but the AAO found it did not demonstrate a career of acclaimed work or sustained national/international acclaim in the final merits determination. An interview published post-filing was not considered.

Performance in a leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputations (Met)

The Director decided the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for one qualifying organization, but the AAO found it did not reflect widespread acclaim or place him among the very top of the field, nor was it sustained. The Petitioner failed to argue how his performance was leading or critical for the entity itself.

High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services (Met)

The Director decided the Petitioner met this criterion, but the AAO concluded in the final merits analysis that his earnings were not at a level reflecting national or international acclaim or placing him among the small percentage at the top of his field, lacking proper comparative evidence for top-tier actors.

Membership in associations in the field which require outstanding achievements of their members (Not Met)

The Petitioner's membership in the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences was noted as notable, but it was not sufficiently demonstrated to be indicative of sustained national acclaim or a level of expertise placing him at the very top of his field, nor was it sustained. It was a single instance predating the petition by six years.

Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)

The Petitioner's career statistics (60+ credits over 23 years) were presented, but he failed to explain how his lengthy career constituted a contribution of major significance or placed him among the small fraction at the very top of his field. Letters from industry professionals, while reflecting achievements, did not sufficiently support top-tier claims.

Display of the alien's work in artistic exhibitions or showcases (Not Met)

The Petitioner highlighted one film that premiered at a film festival, but this single instance and limited supporting evidence (including Wikipedia) were not deemed sufficiently representative of sustained acclaim or indicative of the very high standard required for extensive documentation, nor was the festival shown to be on par with prestigious ones.

Commercial successes in the performing arts (Not Met)

The Petitioner claimed films grossed over $34 million and cited an appearance in a popular Netflix series. However, the AAO found a lack of comparative evidence for box office receipts and that his single-episode appearance in the Netflix series was not consequential enough to attribute the series' success to him, thus not demonstrating sustained national/international acclaim.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner, an actor, failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field, despite meeting three initial criteria (published material, leading/critical role, high salary). In the final merits determination, the evidence was insufficient. Specifically, his membership in the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, published material, career statistics (60+ credits over 23 years), a single film premiere at a film festival, and commercial success (films grossing $34 million, one Netflix episode) did not demonstrate the required level of sustained acclaim or top-tier expertise. Evidence post-dating the petition filing was not considered.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested clarification on the claimed criteria due to an initial incorrect classification box. The petitioner responded by submitting a corrected petition and a brief statement claiming seven regulatory criteria, which were then evaluated by the Director and AAO.

RFE Targets
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major mediaPerformance in a leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputationsHigh salary or other significantly high remuneration for servicesMembership in associations in the field which require outstanding achievements of their membersOriginal scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the fieldDisplay of the alien's work in artistic exhibitions or showcasesCommercial successes in the performing arts

Evidence

Evidence Types
Media Coverage
Professional Memberships
Original Contributions
High Salary
Commercial Success
Reference Letters Dependent
Exhibitions
Evidence Submitted
  • appeared in multiple feature films and television series
  • membership in the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences
  • published material
  • performed in a leading or critical role
  • high salary or remuneration
  • 60+ acting credits (39 television series, 13 feature films, 8 television movies)
  • film premiered at a film festival
  • films grossing over $34 million in the United States and Canada
  • appearance in a Netflix series
  • O-1 nonimmigrant visa approval

Similar Cases

Others

Performing Arts · Armenia

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-07-25
The Petitioner's awards (Best Actress 2012 and Honored Artist 2011) were received several years before filing and did not demonstrate continuing acclaim. Her film and TV roles were primarily supporting, and media coverage was largely in publications with limited reach. The judging experience involved children's competitions, which did not reflect the high level of expertise required for the classification.

Others

Performing Arts · Kazakhstan

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2025-01-08
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate eligibility under at least three of the ten EB-1A criteria. Specifically, the Petitioner did not establish that her awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in acting, that her association memberships required outstanding achievements as judged by experts, that published materials about her were in major media, that her contributions were original and of major significance, or that her salary was high relative to others in the field. The AAO found the evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim and that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.

Others

Entertainment

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
California 2024-04-08
The Petitioner failed to meet the membership criterion as ANDI 'Partner' status did not require outstanding achievements. Published material in 27prmedia.com and examiner.com lacked evidence of major media status, and other articles lacked required metadata or were not about the Petitioner. Financial evidence showed yearly earnings (max $19,600) well below the California average for actors ($26,989), and box office receipts for films like 'The Angriest Man in Brooklyn' ($1.49M) were not shown to be commercially successful relative to the industry.

Others

Performing Arts

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-11-18
The motion to reopen was dismissed due to the absence of new facts or documentary evidence. The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that the prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The AAO found the Petitioner did not meet the published material criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii)) as the article was not established to be about him and the website's major media status was not proven. Additionally, the commercial success criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(x)) was not met because the success of projects was not attributable to the Petitioner's specific work.

Frequently Asked Questions

A dismissed EB-1A petition means USCIS found the evidence insufficient to meet the eligibility criteria. Common reasons include weak documentation, failure to meet the required number of criteria, or insufficient evidence of the claimed qualifications. Petitioners can refile with stronger evidence or explore alternative visa categories.

Browse More Cases

More dismissed cases More Performing Arts cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-09-25.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 7

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299

Related Pages

EB-1A Overview All EB-1A Cases EB-1A Dashboard

Get Case Insights

Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.

Join Waitlist