How common are denied EB-1A petitions?

EB-1A petition outcomes vary based on the strength of evidence, the specific criteria addressed, and the adjudicating officer. Each case is evaluated individually based on its own merits and documentation.

How does the Eyelash Styling and Beauty Business industry affect EB-1A petition outcomes?

The Eyelash Styling and Beauty Business sector has unique considerations for EB-1A petitions. USCIS evaluates whether the petitioner's qualifications and contributions align with the specific requirements of the visa category. Industry context matters for demonstrating the significance and impact of the petitioner's work.

dismissed EB-1A

Beautician And Eyelash Artist

Eyelash Styling And Beauty Business · 2024-11-25

Decision Date

2024-11-25

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

0 of 3 criteria met

Awards and Prizes (Not Met)

The Petitioner received 10 awards from five competitions in 2023, but did not demonstrate how these awards indicate sustained national or international acclaim or place her among the upper echelon of the field.

Membership in Associations (Not Met)

The Petitioner's membership and accreditation as a Trainer with the International Association of Judges Lash and Brown Industry (IAJLBI) in January 2023 did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or distinguish her as being at the very top of the field.

Published Material About the Alien (Not Met)

Nine articles published in 2023, including one in Forbes Woman (Kazakhstan), indicated some recent attention, but the Petitioner did not establish that this coverage was consistent with sustained national or international acclaim or being among the very top of the field.

Judging the Work of Others (Not Met)

The Petitioner judged three championships in 2023, but did not establish that this narrow experience contributed to a finding of a career of acclaimed work or sustained national/international acclaim, or that it set her apart from others at the very top.

Scholarly Articles (Not Met)

The Petitioner published six articles and two training guides in 2023, but did not demonstrate that this publication record was consistent with a career of acclaimed work, sustained national/international acclaim, or being among the small percentage at the very top of her field, lacking evidence of impact or citations.

Original Contributions of Major Significance (Not Met)

While recommendation letters praised her 'novel approaches' and 'significant influence,' they lacked detailed information and explanation to demonstrate that her contributions were viewed by the overall field as being of major significance, consistent with sustained national or international acclaim.

Leading or Critical Role (Not Met)

The Petitioner founded and operated a beauty studio and school, but did not establish that her business received widespread acclaim or drew significant attention from the greater field, or that her role placed her among the small percentage at the very top.

High Salary or Other Remuneration (Not Met)

The Petitioner documented her income as an entrepreneur since 2019, but did not establish that her earnings were commensurate with sustained national or international acclaim or that she commanded a salary indicative of being among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field. Despite presenting 10 awards from five competitions, membership and accreditation with IAJLBI, nine media articles (including Forbes Woman Kazakhstan), judging three championships, publishing six articles and two training guides, and operating a beauty studio/school, the evidence did not show the required significance, widespread recognition, or comparative standing against others at the top of the field. Specifically, awards were not shown to be 'upper echelon,' media coverage lacked comparative context, judging experience was narrow, publications lacked citation history or impact, and earnings were not demonstrated to be commensurate with top professionals.

Evidence

Evidence Types

Awards

Media Coverage

Professional Memberships

Judging Experience

Scholarly Articles

Original Contributions

Reference Letters Dependent

High Salary

Commercial Success

Evidence Submitted

10 awards received from five competitions from 2023
membership and 'qualification as a Trainer, with the right to teach accreditation course' with the International Association of Judges Lash and Brown Industry (IAJLBI) in January 2023
nine articles published in 2023, including one in Forbes Woman (Kazakhstan)
judged three championships in 2023
published six articles in 2023
published two training guides
delivery agreements reflecting two parties purchasing her books
recommendation letters
founded and operated a beauty studio and school
documented income as an entrepreneur of her beauty salon since 2019

Similar Cases

Makeup Artist

Cosmetics

USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded

2024-08-06

The Director's decision was withdrawn and the matter remanded because the decision did not adequately address the Petitioner's claims and evidence regarding the judging criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv)) and failed to consider the Petitioner's RFE response for the exhibition criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii)). The AAO found the decision insufficient for review, preventing a fair opportunity to contest on appeal.

Designer

Art and Design · Armenia

USCIS EB-1A dismissed

2024-11-25

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of the visual arts field. While she received about a half dozen awards (2010-2019), mostly government-sponsored or youth-based, and had limited media coverage (about one article per year from 2013-2023), these were not indicative of the upper echelon. Her membership with the Union Designers of Armenia, judging three exhibitions (2015-2016), and displaying work in various venues did not distinguish her or garner widespread acclaim consistent with the high standard for extraordinary ability. Her participation in construction projects also did not result in widespread acclaim or significant attention.

Others

Art and Design · Moldova

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

2024-07-03

The motion was dismissed because the Petitioner did not meet the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2) or (3). Specifically, the Petitioner failed to satisfy the membership criterion (UNITEM), the judging criterion (lack of specific dates and roles), and the high salary criterion (lack of payroll/tax statements and flawed comparative data). Only one criterion (display) was previously satisfied, falling short of the required three.

Director

Media · China

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

California 2024-09-16

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirements, establishing only one of the ten criteria (leading or critical role) instead of the required three. Specific criteria like awards, memberships, published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, exhibitions, and high salary were not met due to issues such as awards given to the employer, job duties not qualifying as judging, lack of full English translations for articles, contributions not proven to be of major significance, and insufficient comparative wage data for the high salary claim. The AAO concluded the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner was among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

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 Hair and Beauty cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-11-25.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed

Criteria Met 0 / 3

Evidence Types 9

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 883

Success Rate 52.8%

Sustained 466

Dismissed 300

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