This appeal was not successful at this stage
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner met only two of the required three evidentiary criteria. The AAO reversed the Director on the artistic display criterion by accepting broadcast journalism as comparable evidence, but upheld denials on the lesser awards and leading/critical role criteria.
1 more criterion would trigger a full merits review.
A Venezuelan sports journalist filed an EB-1A extraordinary ability petition claiming evidence across multiple criteria. The Texas Service Center denied the petition, finding only one of ten criteria met. On appeal, the AAO found in the petitioner's favor on the artistic display criterion, holding that broadcast journalism on television, radio, and social media is comparable to display at artistic exhibitions or showcases under the comparable evidence provision. However, the AAO upheld denial of the lesser awards criterion because no evidence showed that the petitioner's 'Sports Journalist of the Year' award was recognized by audiences beyond the issuing association. The leading/critical role criterion also failed because association letters confirmed only that the petitioner served on a selection committee without explaining why his role was more important than any other member's. With only two criteria met (judging and artistic display/comparable), the petitioner fell short of the required three, and the appeal was dismissed.
What worked: The petitioner successfully argued that the artistic display criterion did not readily apply to journalism, and the AAO accepted broadcast journalism on television, radio, and social media as genuinely comparable evidence of display at artistic exhibitions or showcases, reversing the Director's denial of that criterion.
What failed: The 'Sports Journalist of the Year' award failed because the record contained no external evidence — such as media coverage or third-party acknowledgment — showing the award was recognized beyond the issuing association. The leading/critical role claim failed because the letters only confirmed committee membership without explaining why the petitioner's specific role was more important than other panel members' roles.
Takeaway: For lesser awards, petitioners must document external recognition of the award (e.g., press coverage, third-party references) beyond letters from the issuing organization itself. For leading/critical role claims on a committee, petitioners should submit evidence specifically explaining why their individual contribution was of greater importance than other members' roles.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-1A criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The petitioner successfully argued that the artistic display criterion did not readily apply to journalism, and the AAO accepted broadcast journalism on television, radio, and social media as genuinely comparable evidence of display at artistic exhibitions or showcases, reversing the Director's denial of that criterion.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The 'Sports Journalist of the Year' award failed because the record contained no external evidence — such as media coverage or third-party acknowledgment — showing the award was recognized beyond the issuing association
- The leading/critical role claim failed because the letters only confirmed committee membership without explaining why the petitioner's specific role was more important than other panel members' roles.
Criterion-by-criterion breakdown
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Not metPetitioner won a 'Sports Journalist of the Year' award from an international press association in 2020, but failed to show national or international recognition of the award outside the issuing association. Recommendation letters from peers did not mention the award.
Judging the work of others
MetDirector found this criterion met; not disputed on appeal. Petitioner served on a nine-member committee selecting Venezuela's athlete of the year since 2007.
Authorship of scholarly articles
Not metDirector found insufficient evidence; petitioner did not challenge this finding on appeal, effectively waiving the issue.
Display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
Reversed in their favorDirector denied this criterion, finding broadcast work did not appear at artistic exhibitions or showcases. AAO reversed, accepting broadcast journalism on television, radio, and social media as comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4), finding the criterion does not readily apply to journalism.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Not metPetitioner claimed a critical role on the athlete-of-the-year selection committee. Association letters confirmed membership and distinguished reputation but did not explain why petitioner's role was more important than other panel members' roles.
Evidence of participation as a judge of others' work (judging criterion met, undisputed on appeal)
Broadcast journalism on television, radio, and social media accepted as comparable evidence of display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases
History and role of the Venezuelan sports journalist association accepted as demonstrating distinguished reputation for criterion viii purposes
'Sports Journalist of the Year' 2020 award: no external evidence showing national or international recognition of the award beyond the issuing association
Recommendation letters from peers did not mention the award, undermining its claimed recognition
Association letters for leading/critical role criterion did not explain why petitioner's committee role was more important than other members' roles
Director failed to address the lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards criterion (criterion i) despite the petitioner providing responsive RFE evidence, requiring the AAO to decide it in the first instance.
Director incorrectly denied the artistic display criterion without considering whether comparable evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) applied to broadcast journalism.
Completed
I-140 filed
Sports journalist and broadcaster who covered sporting events for newspapers and television networks
Completed
Texas Service Center — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2025-04-07
AAO decision — Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner met only two of the required three evidentiary criteria. The AAO reversed the Director on the artistic display criterion by accepting broadcast journalism as comparable evidence, but upheld denials on the lesser awards and leading/critical role criteria.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee