Religious Faith Writer And Advocate For The Disabled

The Petitioner failed to provide evidence that his two books were published in professional or major trade publications or other major media, thus not meeting the scholarly articles criterion. His Rabbinical Certificate was not accepted as a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award for excellence. The AAO did not evaluate the remaining two claimed criteria (original contributions and leading/critical role) as the Petitioner could not numerically meet the required three criteria. The record, in aggregate, did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field, despite meeting three initial criteria. Evidence of published material about the Petitioner was limited to 2023-2024, failing to show sustained acclaim over a long period. A single article published in 1990 lacked evidence of citations or sustained acclaim. A leading or critical role in 2014 also lacked evidence of sustained acclaim. Contributions to employers were noted, but major significance to the broader field of Stage Construction and Engineering as it applies to Art, Theatre, and Film Production was not established. Furthermore, the record lacked comparative salary data to prove a high salary in relation to others in the field, which would indicate being at the very top.

The Petitioner did not meet the minimum requirement of satisfying at least three EB-1A criteria, which precluded a final merits determination. The motion to reconsider was dismissed as it broadly disagreed with prior conclusions without identifying specific legal errors, and the motion to reopen was dismissed for failing to provide new facts or documentary evidence.