Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued

Director Of Global Marketing And Communication Strategy And Planning, As Well As Head Of Visual Design

Media And Communication · China · 2024-09-16

Decision Date
2024-09-16
Location
California
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
Performing in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation (Met)

The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence, including detailed descriptions from former employers, an organizational chart, and recommendation letters, to establish that he performed in leading or critical roles for organizations with distinguished reputations.

Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizes (Not Met)

The Petitioner's degrees, certificates, scholarships, and fellowships were not considered awards for excellence. The two specific awards mentioned were given to the Petitioner's employer, not the Petitioner, and were not contested on appeal.

Memberships in associations that require outstanding achievements (Not Met)

The Petitioner provided evidence of participation in a conference panel, an award ceremony as a judge, and a strategy committee. However, no evidence was submitted to show these associations require outstanding achievements judged by experts, and participation in the committee appeared to be a job duty.

Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Not Met)

The Petitioner failed to provide full English translations for several articles, circulation statistics for publications, or evidence that the materials discussed the value of his work in media and communication. Some materials were personal biographies or marketing, not about his work's value.

Participating as a judge of the work of others in the field (Not Met)

The Petitioner's job responsibilities to 'recruit, appraise and guide qualified personnel' were deemed inherent job duties, not evidence of being invited to judge the work of others in the field. No independent evidence of actual participation as a judge was provided.

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

Recommendation letters generally praised the Petitioner but lacked specificity on how his contributions were both original and of major significance to media and communication. Original articles lacked full English translations, and claims of global impact were not supported by direct citations or explanations of significance to the field.

Authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Not Met)

The Petitioner authored articles as a journalist and a work of fiction. However, no evidence was provided that the book was in his field or published in a professional/major trade publication, and this criterion was not contested on appeal.

Display of work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases (Not Met)

While the Petitioner's artwork was displayed, the Director determined these exhibitions were not related to his field of media and communication. The Petitioner's arguments about art and business being interdisciplinary were not accepted, and this criterion was not contested on appeal.

Commanding a high salary, or other significantly high remuneration, in relation to others in the field (Not Met)

While the Petitioner provided evidence of his salary (W-2, pay stubs, offer letter), the comparative wage data from BLS and Payscale.com was deemed inappropriate for his specific director-level position in media and communication, lacking specific job descriptions for accurate comparison.

Why This Petition Was Denied

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.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested additional evidence for all nine claimed criteria, stating the initial submission was insufficient. The Petitioner responded by submitting more evidence and reasserting seven criteria, but did not provide new evidence for judging or scholarly articles, effectively conceding those points.

RFE Targets
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizesMemberships in associations that require outstanding achievementsPublished material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major mediaParticipating as a judge of the work of others in the fieldOriginal scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the fieldAuthorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major mediaDisplay of work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcasesPerforming in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputationCommanding a high salary, or other significantly high remuneration, in relation to others in the field

Evidence

Evidence Types
Awards
Media Coverage
Reference Letters Dependent
Original Contributions
Scholarly Articles
Exhibitions
Leading Role
High Salary
Professional Memberships
Evidence Submitted
  • Two undergraduate degrees from China
  • Master's degree in fine arts from the United States
  • Two certificates of completion from a Visiting Professional Program
  • Scholarship, 2019
  • Scholarship, 2021
  • Fellowship, 2021
  • Participation as a panel member at the 2013 Conference of China
  • Participation as a judge at the Award Ceremony of Outstanding Brands of Chinese
  • Membership of the Global Marcom Strategy Committee
  • Several published articles mentioning or featuring the Petitioner
  • Printed entries published on Wikipedia and biographic information on websites
  • Recommendation letters and an expert opinion letter
  • Original articles and reports about the automotive industry in China
  • Self-published book of fiction
  • Original artwork displayed at artistic exhibitions
  • Roles with various news outlets in China and an electric vehicle company
  • Organizational chart reflecting leadership position
  • 2022 IRS Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement ($166,881.28)
  • May 2023 employment verification letter ($180,000 annual compensation)
  • Pay stubs for March and April 2023

Similar Cases

Marketing Manager

Marketing and Advertising · China

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2025-02-03
The motions were dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Specific reasons included: the Summit Creative Award was given to the company, not the individual; published materials about the Petitioner lacked complete translations and did not pertain to his field; judging roles were everyday business decisions, not formal judging; original contributions lacked major significance; membership in associations was for an ad hoc panel, not a permanent association; scholarly articles were a speech, not a published article; and artistic exhibitions were not shown to be in the field of media and communication. The Petitioner only met one of the required three evidentiary criteria.

Business Consultant

Consulting · Georgia

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
Pennsylvania 2025-02-03
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide sufficient objective evidence to meet at least three of the ten EB-1A criteria. Specifically, the Petitioner did not adequately demonstrate membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements, participation as a judge of others' work, original contributions of major significance, authorship of scholarly articles, or high remuneration. While two criteria (published material and leading role) were initially met, the evidence was not sustained, and the record did not show the Petitioner was among the small percentage at the very top of her field, especially lacking sustained prominence in later years.

Director

Public Relations · Russia

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-03-05
The Petitioner did not establish that she met the criteria for awards (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)), memberships (ii), published material (iii), or high remuneration (ix). The motion was dismissed because it primarily addressed reserved criteria (original contributions and leading roles) rather than providing a cogent argument against the specific grounds for the previous dismissal.

Others

Art and Design · Brazil

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-11-26
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidence requirements of demonstrating a one-time achievement or meeting at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, awards were not nationally/internationally recognized, memberships lacked outstanding achievement requirements, published material was not from major media, original contributions lacked major significance, displays were not artistic exhibitions of work product, a lead role was not specified, and commercial success lacked documentation of actual revenues despite high follower/view counts.

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 Media cases More cases from China

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-09-16.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 1 / 3
Evidence Types 9

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 China 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