Good news — this case cleared the first bar
The AAO withdrew SCOPS's denial and remanded the case because the petitioner demonstrated at least three evidentiary criteria were met (including high salary), triggering the required totality-of-the-record analysis for extraordinary ability in the arts.
Next step: a full merits review weighing all the evidence together.
A tattoo studio petitioned for O-1B classification for a Venezuelan-born tattoo artist based in Argentina. SCOPS denied the petition, finding fewer than three evidentiary criteria met. On appeal, the AAO agreed with SCOPS on several criteria—finding that tattoo magazine contest awards were not comparable to top-tier industry prizes, that self-compiled photo documents failed to satisfy the lead/starring participant criterion, and that self-authored interview statements did not establish major commercial or critical acclaim. However, the AAO found SCOPS made a legal error in analyzing the high-salary criterion by converting the beneficiary's Argentine peso income to U.S. dollars rather than comparing it to Argentine wage benchmarks. When correctly compared, the beneficiary earned approximately 40 times the highest average annual salary for tattoo artists in Argentina, satisfying the high-salary criterion. Because the petitioner had now demonstrated at least three criteria, the AAO remanded for a totality-of-the-record extraordinary ability analysis.
What worked: The high-salary criterion was ultimately met because the beneficiary's Argentine peso earnings were approximately 40 times the top average tattoo artist salary in Argentina—a comparison the AAO required SCOPS to make correctly using local wage data rather than converting to U.S. dollars.
What failed: Contest awards from a tattoo magazine were not shown to carry prestige comparable to an Academy Award or Grammy. Self-compiled photo albums did not satisfy the evidentiary types required for the lead/starring participant or commercial success criteria. Self-authored interview quotes and social media posts did not qualify as major commercial acclaim or third-party critical recognition.
Takeaway: When a beneficiary earns income abroad, always present salary comparisons using local wage statistics for the relevant country—never rely solely on a U.S.-dollar conversion. For the lead/starring and commercial success criteria, submit third-party critical reviews, formal advertisements, or published trade coverage rather than self-compiled photo collections or social media posts.
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 O-1B criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The high-salary criterion was ultimately met because the beneficiary's Argentine peso earnings were approximately 40 times the top average tattoo artist salary in Argentina—a comparison the AAO required SCOPS to make correctly using local wage data rather than converting to U.S
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- Contest awards from a tattoo magazine were not shown to carry prestige comparable to an Academy Award or Grammy
- Self-compiled photo albums did not satisfy the evidentiary types required for the lead/starring participant or commercial success criteria
- Self-authored interview quotes and social media posts did not qualify as major commercial acclaim or third-party critical recognition.
Completed
I-129 filed
Tattoo artist specializing in realism, color, and black-and-gray styles
Completed
SCOPS — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2025-05-14
AAO decision — Remanded
The AAO withdrew SCOPS's denial and remanded the case because the petitioner demonstrated at least three evidentiary criteria were met (including high salary), triggering the required totality-of-the-record analysis for extraordinary ability in the arts.
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.