Date of Decision: December 31, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Field of Expertise: Acrobatic Gymnastics and Performance
Petitioner Information
Profession: Acrobatic Performer
Field: Acrobatic Gymnastics and Performance
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner met this criterion by demonstrating receipt of several awards, including bronze and silver medals at the European Championship in acrobatic gymnastics and gold medals at the National Sports Acrobatics Championships, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i).
Criteria Not Met:
One-time Achievement: The Petitioner claimed that his bronze medal in acrobatic gymnastics at the World Games should be considered a major, internationally recognized award. However, the Director concluded that the World Games medal does not meet the stringent criteria for a one-time achievement comparable to an Olympic medal or Nobel Prize, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in the National Senior Sports Acrobatics Team but did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii).
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner claimed a leading or critical role as a performer in a prominent acrobatic show. However, the evidence did not establish how his role was critical to the organization’s success. Letters from his employers praised his performance but did not provide detailed evidence of his essential contributions, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
High Salary or Remuneration: The Petitioner provided evidence of his salary but did not clearly establish his hourly wage or how it compared to others in his field. The Director noted inconsistencies and insufficient comparative data, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner demonstrated receipt of several medals in national and international competitions, satisfying this criterion.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of published material in major media about him.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s contributions were not demonstrated to have major significance in the field of acrobatic gymnastics.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner did not establish that his memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner did not establish his roles as leading or critical in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of a high salary compared to others in his field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including letters of recommendation, articles, and evidence of awards. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that he met at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Petitioner satisfied the criterion for lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards, the evidence provided did not establish his receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, his memberships in associations requiring outstanding achievements, his leading or critical roles in distinguished organizations, or his high salary compared to others in his field. The totality of the evidence 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 his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of his contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit his qualifications.
