Musician

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field. While the Director found three criteria met (published material, scholarly articles, and display of work), the awards presented were not established as nationally or internationally recognized, and scholarships were deemed academic training rather than qualifying awards. The Petitioner's appeal brief also failed to adequately address the specific shortcomings identified in the Director's final merits determination, leading to those issues being considered waived.

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 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.