Date of Decision: June 27, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Jiu-Jitsu Coach
Field: Martial Arts Coaching and Development
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Awards: The petitioner provided evidence of receiving lesser awards related to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu tournaments.
- Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner demonstrated participation as a referee in Jiu-Jitsu competitions, meeting the requirements for this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
- Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The petitioner claimed the development of unique coaching techniques and the establishment of a tournament as evidence of major contributions.
- Supporting letters lacked specific details or corroborating evidence to establish a significant impact on the Jiu-Jitsu field.
- Performance in a Leading or Critical Role:
- Evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s roles in organizations were critical to their success or that the organizations had distinguished reputations.
Key Points from the Decision
Original Contributions:
The petitioner failed to demonstrate that his coaching techniques and tournament had a substantial impact on the broader Jiu-Jitsu field. Letters of support were deemed complimentary but insufficiently detailed to establish the petitioner’s work as original or significant.
Leading or Critical Role:
While the petitioner served as a coach and competitor, evidence was insufficient to show the critical nature of his contributions to organizational success or reputation.
Comparable Evidence:
The petitioner suggested that due to the nature of Jiu-Jitsu coaching, the provided evidence should qualify as comparable evidence. However, the AAO determined that the criteria for extraordinary ability in this field were applicable, and comparable evidence was not permissible under the regulations.
Supporting Documentation
Awards Evidence: Documentation of awards was provided but lacked evidence of significant national or international recognition.
Judging Activities: Evidence of referee roles at competitions.
Contribution Claims: Letters and materials lacked specifics to substantiate the claimed contributions as major.
Leadership Evidence: Insufficient documentation of critical roles or distinguished organizational reputations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met two of the evidentiary criteria but failed to satisfy the regulatory requirement of at least three. The record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field.
