Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A

Executive Producer, Chief Executive Office

Content Production · Brazil · 2024-11-18

Decision Date
2024-11-18
Location
Florida
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

1 of 3 criteria met
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is sought. (Met)

The Director determined that the Petitioner met this criterion, and the AAO did not disturb that determination. The Petitioner and his work have been discussed in several publications.

Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field. (Not Met)

While the Petitioner's entertainment and marketing content may be original, the evidence discussing or recognizing his work does not identify any aspect that constituted a contribution of major significance in the field. Assertions of influence and reputation were not supported by specific evidence.

Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. (Not Met)

The record did not include sufficient documentation to support the distinguished reputation of the Petitioner's production company. Although his company worked with distinguished organizations, the record did not demonstrate that the Petitioner himself performed in a leading or critical role for those organizations.

Evidence of the alien's commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. (Not Met)

The Petitioner's assertions of 'constant demand' and 'media exposure' were insufficient. Contractual agreements with 'substantial fees' paid to his company were not explained as evidence of commercial success through sales volumes for his productions, and no probative evidence of sales volumes was provided.

Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. (Not Met)

The Director concluded the Petitioner did not meet this criterion, and the Petitioner did not address it on appeal, thus waiving the issue.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The Director found only one criterion met (published material about himself and his work). The AAO concluded the Petitioner did not meet criteria for original contributions of major significance, performing in a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations, or commercial successes in the performing arts. Evidence did not show major significance of contributions, the company's distinguished reputation, or commercial success through sales volumes or box office receipts. The record did not demonstrate the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

Evidence

Evidence Types
Published Material
Reference Letters Dependent
Original Contributions
Commercial Success
Awards
Media Coverage
Leading Role
Exhibitions
Evidence Submitted
  • Published material about himself and his work
  • Certificate of appreciation for sponsorship
  • Work on original movies and television series
  • Content produced for various clients
  • Media publications discussing his work
  • Letters of support from previous colleagues
  • Production services agreement
  • Contractual agreements for services with substantial fees

Similar Cases

Others

Entertainment

USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-09-25
The AAO remanded the case because the Director's decision lacked sufficient analysis and discussion of the evidence, reaching conclusory findings without proper explanation. Specifically, the Director failed to adequately address all claimed evidentiary criteria, improperly dismissed evidence due to perceived translation certification issues without explaining the problem, and incorrectly stated that employment verification letters were not provided. The decision did not fully explain the reasons for denial, hindering a fair appeal and meaningful appellate review.

Director

Entertainment · Turkey

USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-08-14
The AAO found that the Director erred in evaluating the evidence for original contributions and leading/critical roles. The Petitioner demonstrated original contributions of major significance by co-founding and serving as Vice-Chairman for an organization that successfully advocated for union rights for advertising professionals in Turkey, leading to the incorporation of the 'Advertising Professionals Union' into the 'Turkish Cinema and Broadcasting Union'. This effort addressed substandard working conditions and highlighted advertisers' $120 billion annual contribution to Turkey's economy. The Petitioner also demonstrated leading/critical roles as Head of Production for an internationally known advertising agency, successfully leading campaigns for clients like Netflix, which garnered multiple awards (e.g., Best Social Media Campaign, Best Digital Art Direction, Best Branded Film Content). Another campaign for Amnesty International, highlighting imprisoned journalists, generated over 1.2 million impressions and reached 3 million people in Turkey, winning a Golden Drum award.

Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Marketing and Advertising · Nigeria

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-04-17
The Petitioner failed to meet the membership criterion as EMCOAN's constitution allows any content owner to join without proving outstanding achievements. The high remuneration criterion was not met because bank statements were inconsistent and did not distinguish salary from other income, and the salary surveys provided were contradictory. The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the top of his field.

Others

Others

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-10-01
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field, despite meeting three initial criteria. Evidence of published material about the Petitioner was limited to 2023-2024, failing to show sustained acclaim over a long period. A single article published in 1990 lacked evidence of citations or sustained acclaim. A leading or critical role in 2014 also lacked evidence of sustained acclaim. Contributions to employers were noted, but major significance to the broader field of Stage Construction and Engineering as it applies to Art, Theatre, and Film Production was not established. Furthermore, the record lacked comparative salary data to prove a high salary in relation to others in the field, which would indicate being at the very top.

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 Entertainment cases More cases from Brazil

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-11-18.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
Criteria Met 1 / 3
Evidence Types 8

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299

Related Pages

EB-1A Overview EB-1A in Brazil 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