Actor

The Petitioner only satisfied two of the ten criteria (published material and leading/critical role), failing to meet the minimum requirement of three. Specifically, his reported wages of $130,500 and $75,000 were below the mean for agents and business managers in his geographic areas. Additionally, the record did not demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for the final merits determination.

The Petitioner failed to meet any of the ten EB-1A criteria. While she received awards, they lacked evidence of national or international recognition; her memberships did not require outstanding achievements; and her published materials were not shown to be in major media. Although she performed a critical role for her employer, the organization was not proven to have a distinguished reputation.

The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner, an actor, failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field, despite meeting three initial criteria (published material, leading/critical role, high salary). In the final merits determination, the evidence was insufficient. Specifically, his membership in the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, published material, career statistics (60+ credits over 23 years), a single film premiere at a film festival, and commercial success (films grossing $34 million, one Netflix episode) did not demonstrate the required level of sustained acclaim or top-tier expertise. Evidence post-dating the petition filing was not considered.

The evidence failed the final merits determination because the media coverage focused on the Petitioner's status as a 'young artist' rather than the significance of her work, and the awards received at film festivals lacked documentation of national or international prestige. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to prove that her judging roles were the result of national or international renown.