Date of Decision: September 27, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Coach
Field: Sports Coaching
Nationality: [Nationality not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence: The petitioner won six awards between 2011 and 2020.
- Published materials in professional publications or major media: The petitioner had materials published in professional publications or major media.
- Judging the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization: The petitioner served as a judge in his field.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his memberships required outstanding achievements.
- Original contributions of major significance in his field: The petitioner failed to prove his contributions were of major significance.
- Display of his work in the field at artistic exhibitions and showcases: The petitioner did not show that his work was displayed in significant exhibitions or showcases.
- Leading or critical roles with organizations that have a distinguished reputation: The petitioner did not establish that he played a leading or critical role in reputable organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner received multiple awards, but the final merits analysis did not sufficiently discuss their significance or the prestige associated with them.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The final merits analysis acknowledged the publication of materials but did not assess if they contributed to sustained national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The evidence provided did not convincingly demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions were of major significance to the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s role as a judge was noted, but its impact on his recognition in the field was not thoroughly evaluated.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s memberships were considered but found lacking in demonstrating outstanding achievements required for those associations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No specific findings were detailed regarding the petitioner’s authorship of scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that he performed a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
There was no evidence provided to meet this criterion.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
This criterion was not discussed in the decision.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable as the petitioner’s field is sports coaching.
Supporting Documentation
- Awards Certificates: Summarized evidence of six awards received by the petitioner.
- Published Articles: Collection of published materials featuring the petitioner.
- Expert Opinion Letters: Letters from professionals and industry experts supporting the petitioner’s claims.
- Membership Proof: Documentation of the petitioner’s membership in professional associations.
- Judging Invitations: Evidence of the petitioner’s participation as a judge in relevant events.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Director’s decision was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further review.
Reasoning: The initial decision lacked a detailed analysis of the petitioner’s evidence and did not consider the totality of the provided material. The Director must reassess whether the petitioner’s achievements demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and if he belongs to the small percentage at the top of his field.
Next Steps: The Director is instructed to evaluate the new evidence provided on appeal and conduct a thorough analysis of all claimed criteria.
