Date of Decision: February 4, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Acrobatic Gymnastics Coach
Field: Sports and Coaching
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Judging the Work of Others: The Petitioner met this criterion by providing evidence that he holds judging credentials issued by the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) and has participated as a judge at acrobatic gymnastics competitions since 2009.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner provided evidence that he coached athletes who received medals at international acrobatic gymnastics events such as the European Championships, World Cup, and World Age Group Championships. However, the Petitioner did not establish that he himself received these awards. The awards were given to the athletes he coached, not to him directly.
Published Material in Major Media: The Petitioner provided articles from various sources, but these articles did not consistently include the title, date, or author and were not focused on the Petitioner. Additionally, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the sources qualify as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner claimed original contributions based on his coaching achievements and the success of his athletes. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these contributions were of major significance. The letters provided praised the Petitioner’s work but lacked specific, detailed information on how his contributions significantly impacted the field.
Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations: The Petitioner claimed leading roles in various organizations but did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that these organizations have distinguished reputations or that his roles were critical to their success. The letters and documentation provided did not offer specific, detailed information explaining how the Petitioner’s role was critical.
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in associations such as USA Gymnastics and FIG. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The criteria for membership were based on participation and passing certain courses, not on outstanding achievements.
High Salary or Remuneration: The Petitioner provided copies of his IRS Forms W-2 indicating his earnings for several years. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that his salary was high in relation to others in the field. The provided salary data showed that his earnings were close to the average for a coach in his area and with his level of experience.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that he personally received nationally or internationally recognized awards. The awards cited were for athletes he coached, not for him directly.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that published materials about him were in major trade or professional publications or other major media. The articles lacked proper attribution and were not focused on the Petitioner.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The letters lacked specific details on the impact and significance of his contributions.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner served as a judge for acrobatic gymnastics competitions, satisfying this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that he performed leading or critical roles for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that he commanded a high salary or remuneration relative to others in his field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met one criterion but did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The Petitioner should also ensure that all evidence is properly attributed and translated, and that it clearly demonstrates the required levels of recognition and impact.