Date of Decision: OCT. 5, 2017
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Wrestling Coach
Field: Athletics (Wrestling)
Nationality: [Not Specified in Document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Intent upon Entry:
The Petitioner presented evidence of a job offer as a full-time wrestling coach at a facility in New Jersey. This letter satisfied the requirements at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5), demonstrating his intention to continue working in his area of expertise in the United States.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards for Excellence in the Field of Endeavor:
The record included several award certificates from various competitions. However, the Petitioner failed to provide adequate information about the national or international recognition and significance of these awards. The Director noted a lack of evidence regarding the circulation or distribution of supporting newspaper articles, and the Petitioner did not sufficiently document that the awards are nationally or internationally recognized.
Published Materials About the Petitioner in Professional or Major Trade Publications or Other Major Media:
The submitted articles did not meet the requirements of this criterion as they were not primarily about the Petitioner. Most articles were about competition results or his father’s interest in wrestling. Additionally, the Petitioner did not provide evidence that these materials appeared in professional or major media publications.
Leading or Critical Role for Organizations or Establishments with a Distinguished Reputation:
The reference letters provided praised the Petitioner’s professionalism and talent but lacked specific details about his leading or critical roles. For instance, letters from coaches did not offer precise information about his impact or responsibilities in the organizations. Moreover, the Petitioner did not provide corroborative evidence of his critical role in significant events or teams.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner had several awards at the cadet, junior, and senior levels in Georgia and other locations. However, the significance and recognition of these awards were not sufficiently documented to meet the criterion.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The articles submitted were primarily about competition results rather than focusing on the Petitioner. Moreover, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that these articles appeared in professional or major trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not specifically addressed as met or unmet, indicating a lack of sufficient evidence to establish original contributions of major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Not mentioned, implying no evidence was provided to meet this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not mentioned, implying no evidence was provided to meet this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not mentioned, implying no evidence was provided to meet this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate his leading or critical roles in organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable as the petitioner’s field is athletics.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not mentioned, implying no evidence was provided to meet this criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable as the petitioner’s field is athletics.
Supporting Documentation
- Job Offer Letter:
- Provided by a facility in New Jersey, confirming a full-time coaching position.
- Award Certificates:
- Various certificates from competitions in Albania, India, and other locations. However, lacking context on recognition and significance.
- Reference Letters:
- Letters from colleagues and coaches praising the Petitioner’s skills and professionalism without sufficient detail on specific roles or impact.
- Competition Results and Newspaper Articles:
- Included but lacking in establishing the significance or widespread recognition required for the criteria.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not submit the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documentation meeting at least three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). Additionally, the overall record did not support a finding of extraordinary ability as defined for the classification sought.
Next Steps: For future petitions, the Petitioner should ensure that evidence provided is directly relevant to the specified criteria, thoroughly documented, and clearly demonstrates the significance and recognition of achievements in the field.
