AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision APR162019_03B2203: visual arts and artistic display evidence pitfalls for eb‑1a

For EB‑1A artists, meeting only one criterion (e.g., artistic display) is not enough; petitions must provide strong, specific evidence for at least three criteria, and generic salary comparisons, simple membership cards, or vague claims of originality are routinely rejected. Comparable high‑salary e

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR162019_03B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome dismissed Field or occupation visual arts Final merits discussed No / not stated

Criteria Discussed

  • artistic_display

  • high_salary

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

Criteria Accepted

  • artistic_display

Criteria Rejected

  • high_salary

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

Core Lesson

For EB‑1A artists, meeting only one criterion (e.g., artistic display) is not enough; petitions must provide strong, specific evidence for at least three criteria, and generic salary comparisons, simple membership cards, or vague claims of originality are routinely rejected.

Evidence Issue

  • Comparable high‑salary evidence that meets the regulatory standard

  • Proof that the petitioner held a leading or critical role in a distinguished organization

  • Membership documentation that shows outstanding achievement judged by national or international experts

  • Demonstration of original contributions of major significance and influence on the field

  • Any major, internationally recognized award

How This Connects

This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.

Source Note

Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.