Voice Actor

The Petitioner did not meet the published material criterion as the articles were about the productions rather than the Petitioner himself, and lacked evidence of major media status. The commercial success criterion was not met because gross revenue for dubbed productions was not shown to be attributable to the Petitioner's specific work. No criteria were found to be satisfied in the final analysis.

The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner did not submit new facts or documentary evidence. The motion to reconsider was dismissed as the Petitioner failed to establish that the prior AAO decision (November 2024) was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. Specifically, the Petitioner did not identify specific errors regarding the 'published material' (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii)) and 'commercial success' (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(x)) criteria, nor did they show error in reserving the totality of the evidence analysis.

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 Petitioner failed to meet the membership criterion as ANDI 'Partner' status did not require outstanding achievements. Published material in 27prmedia.com and examiner.com lacked evidence of major media status, and other articles lacked required metadata or were not about the Petitioner. Financial evidence showed yearly earnings (max $19,600) well below the California average for actors ($26,989), and box office receipts for films like 'The Angriest Man in Brooklyn' ($1.49M) were not shown to be commercially successful relative to the industry.