Date of Decision: DEC. 1, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Athlete
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None of the criteria were met according to the USCIS analysis.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards:
The petitioner did not provide evidence that the awards received were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in their field.
Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media:
The petitioner did not submit adequate documentation showing published material about him in major trade publications or other major media.
Participation as a judge of the work of others:
The petitioner did not submit evidence showing participation as a judge of the work of others in their field.
Original contributions of major significance:
The petitioner did not establish that their contributions were of major significance in their field.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
No evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in the field was presented.
Display of the alien’s work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that their work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show his role was critical for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
High remuneration for services:
There was no evidence provided of high salary or remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial successes in the performing arts:
No evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts was provided.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings:
The petitioner did not provide documentation of any recognized awards or prizes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings:
There was no sufficient evidence of published materials about the petitioner in major media or professional publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings:
The contributions claimed by the petitioner were not substantiated as being of major significance to their field.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of participation as a judge in their field.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings:
No evidence was provided to show membership in associations that require outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings:
There was no evidence provided of authorship of scholarly articles in the field.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that they held a leading or critical role in organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings:
No evidence was provided to show participation in artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings:
No evidence was provided to demonstrate a high salary or remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings:
No evidence was provided to show commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
- Award Certificates:
The petitioner provided certificates from various competitions but did not demonstrate national or international recognition. - Published Articles:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of articles about him in major media or professional publications. - Expert Letters:
Letters from experts claimed contributions but lacked detailed evidence of major significance.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that fulfill at least three of the ten lesser criteria. The totality of the material provided did not support a conclusion that the petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. The evidence did not demonstrate that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of their field.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner consider alternative visa classifications or provide additional evidence addressing the deficiencies noted in the appeal decision.
Download the Full Petition Review Here.
