Date of Decision: August 11, 2017
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Bodybuilding Promoter
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner has served as a judge in bodybuilding competitions, which meets the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Awards: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence. Certificates and medals from various bodybuilding organizations were provided, but these did not meet the criterion of being major, internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The petitioner provided articles from sports publications and websites, but these did not include the authors’ names and were not proven to be from major media outlets. Additionally, many articles focused on competitions and only mentioned the petitioner without discussing his work in detail.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Letters from bodybuilders and participation certificates were provided, but the petitioner did not demonstrate how his contributions have had a major impact on the field of bodybuilding.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not establish that the organizations he led have distinguished reputations in the field of bodybuilding. Documentation of affiliations and event invitations were provided, but these did not prove that the organizations are widely recognized as prestigious.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner provided documentation of various certificates and medals, but these were not demonstrated to be recognized nationally or internationally for excellence in the field of bodybuilding.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted various articles and screenshots, but they lacked proper documentation, translations, and evidence of being from major media outlets. Additionally, many articles focused on competitions and only mentioned the petitioner without discussing his work in detail.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s documentation of letters from bodybuilders and participation certificates did not sufficiently demonstrate major contributions to the field of bodybuilding. The petitioner did not show how his involvement had a significant impact beyond the individual athletes he coached.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner served as a judge in bodybuilding competitions, which met this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his memberships in various bodybuilding organizations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not provide evidence to show that the organizations he led are widely recognized as prestigious.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Certificates and Awards: Documentation of various awards and certificates received by the petitioner.
- Articles and Screenshots: Various articles and screenshots, many lacking proper translations and documentation.
- Letters of Support: Letters from bodybuilders and peers in the bodybuilding industry.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider were denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not demonstrate a one-time major achievement or satisfy at least three of the ten regulatory criteria required for EB-1 classification. Despite notable achievements, the petitioner did not establish the level of extraordinary ability required.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider reapplying with additional evidence or exploring other visa categories that may better suit their qualifications and achievements.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
