dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued
Fashion Designer And The Co-Founder And CEO
Fashion Designer And Entrepreneur · Colombia · 2023-04-13
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
2 of 3 criteria metPublished Material (Met)
One article in El Heraldo de Mexico included the required title, date, and author, qualifying as major media.
Judging (Met)
The Petitioner served as a jury member for beauty pageants, which is considered an allied field to fashion design.
Artistic Exhibitions (Not Met)
The events were commercial trade shows for the business of fashion rather than artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Commercial Success (Not Met)
The Petitioner is not a performing artist, and the evidence provided did not relate to box office receipts or similar media sales.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only met two of the ten criteria (published material and judging), failing to meet the minimum of three. Specifically, her participation in fashion markets was not considered 'artistic exhibitions,' and she did not qualify under 'commercial success in performing arts' as she is not a performing artist. Additionally, media coverage was limited to the year prior to filing, failing to show sustained acclaim.
Request for Evidence (RFE)
Unsuccessfully AddressedThe RFE notified the Petitioner of deficiencies in the evidence for multiple criteria. The Petitioner responded with additional evidence, including an accountant's letter, but failed to satisfy the final merits determination.
RFE Targets
Published MaterialJudgingArtistic ExhibitionsCommercial Successoriginal contributionshigh salarymemberships
Evidence
Evidence Types
Media Coverage
Judging Experience
Exhibitions
Commercial Success
High Salary
Original Contributions
Professional Memberships
Evidence Submitted
- Published material in El Heraldo de Mexico
- Jury member for beauty pageants (2020)
- Exhibition of clothing at the Market and events in Colombia
- Letter from an accountant regarding income and net worth
Similar Cases
Fashion Designer
Fashion · Venezuela
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
Florida 2023-02-01
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only met two criteria (judging and exhibitions) instead of the required three. The Mara de Oro award lacked evidence of national recognition, and the submitted articles in Panorama were deemed brief blurbs rather than substantial published material about the Petitioner. Additionally, the Petitioner did not prove her company had a distinguished reputation in the fashion industry.
Fashion Designer
Fashion
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-09-10
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner did not demonstrate a major, internationally recognized award or meet three of the ten evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the Director erred, concluding the Petitioner met three criteria: 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) (published material), 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii) (leading/critical role), and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii) (artistic display). Specifically, the Petitioner's work with D- and its digital fashion designs displayed at C- and T- exhibitions were deemed her own artistic work. The matter was remanded for a final merits review to determine if the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim and is at the very top of her field.
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.
Fashion Designer
Fashion
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-11-12
The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner did not submit new facts supported by documentary evidence to warrant reopening the previous motion, which itself was dismissed as untimely. Even if the previous motion had been timely, it would have been dismissed on the merits because the Petitioner submitted a magazine article dated March-April 2024, which post-dates the petition's filing date of August 31, 2020, and thus could not demonstrate eligibility at the time of filing. The Petitioner also failed to identify any incorrect application of law or policy in the prior appeal decision.
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
Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2023-04-13.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 2 / 3
Evidence Types 7
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 883
Success Rate 52.8%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 300
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist