Date of Decision: June 25, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Fitness Instructor
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii):
The petitioner provided sufficient documentation of published material about her in major media. Examples include articles published on [site name] discussing her work and contributions to the field of fitness.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v):
Although the petitioner has a large online following and her fitness videos have amassed significant views, the evidence did not demonstrate how her work has significantly impacted the fitness industry as a whole.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi):
The translations provided for the submitted articles did not meet the regulatory requirements, lacking full and properly certified English translations.
Leading or Critical Role at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii):
The petitioner did not establish that her role as the face of certain brands equated to a leading or critical role within organizations of distinguished reputation.
High Salary or Other Significantly High Remuneration at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix):
The agreements provided were not signed by both parties, and there was no evidence demonstrating that the petitioner received the claimed payments.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving any major, internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner met the criterion for published material with articles about her work published in major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Despite the petitioner’s online popularity, the evidence did not show how her contributions have significantly impacted the fitness industry.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Membership in Associations:
Not discussed in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The translations of the articles were incomplete and did not meet regulatory requirements.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s roles as a model or spokesperson did not meet the criterion for leading or critical roles in organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of receiving a high salary or significantly high remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner provided several pieces of evidence, including:
A brief stating new facts to establish eligibility.
Evidence of ineffective assistance from previous attorneys.
An explanation of the steps to file a complaint with the Florida Bar and correspondence related to this complaint.
Letters indicating the complaints were forwarded to the Florida Bar’s branch office for consideration.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not submit the required initial evidence of either a qualifying one-time achievement or documentation that meets at least three of the ten criteria listed. Consequently, the petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the benefit sought.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider consulting with new legal counsel to explore any further options for appeal or other immigration benefits for which she may be eligible.
