Musician

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish meeting three out of ten EB-1A criteria. While the Petitioner met the 'exhibitions' criterion, evidence for 'awards' lacked proof of national/international recognition, 'memberships' did not require outstanding achievement, 'published material' lacked required elements (title, date, author) and context for major media, 'scholarly articles' lacked authorship proof, 'leading role' letters lacked specific details of critical contributions, and 'commercial success' evidence (PayPal, Hotmart, MyEduzz sales, social media views) lacked comparative context or was not directly from music sales, or was dated after the filing. The 'original contributions' criterion was not addressed as it would not change the outcome.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner met only one criterion (artistic display) instead of the required three. Specifically, the prizes lacked documentation of national significance, the media coverage was local and focused on volunteer work rather than musical expertise, and there was no evidence of judging the work of others or holding a leading/critical role in a distinguished organization.

The Petitioner failed to meet the required three criteria; specifically, reference letters lacked detail on how his work influenced the field (original contributions), and YouTube metrics were deemed insufficient or post-dated the filing (commercial success). The record did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is in the small percentage at the top of the field.