Date of Decision: April 6, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Karate Competitor
Field: Martial Arts
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
None of the criteria were met as per the final decision.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner claimed that his awards received at national and international karate competitions qualify as one-time achievements. However, the evidence provided did not establish that these awards are major, internationally recognized awards. The awards cited were for participation and placement in competitions, not for extraordinary achievement on an international scale.
Published Material in Major Media: The Petitioner provided evidence of publications mentioning his achievements in martial arts. However, the articles did not focus primarily on the Petitioner and did not qualify as major media. Additionally, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the publications are considered major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner claimed to have made significant contributions to the field of martial arts through his competition results and training methods. However, the evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the major significance of these contributions. The letters provided praised the Petitioner’s skills and dedication but lacked specific, detailed information on how his contributions significantly impacted the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner provided partial copies of books he authored, along with English translations. The books included basic information about karate techniques and rules, intended for students. Therefore, these books could not be considered qualifying scholarly articles under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi), which requires scholarly articles to be written for learned persons in the field.
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner did not provide evidence that he was a member of associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The memberships cited were based on participation and completion of courses, not on outstanding achievements.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that he personally received nationally or internationally recognized awards. The awards cited were for participation and placement in competitions, not for extraordinary achievement on an international scale.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that published materials about him were in major trade or professional publications or other major media. The articles provided did not focus primarily on the Petitioner.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. The letters lacked specific details on the impact and significance of his contributions.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that he participated as a judge in a capacity that would meet the required standards.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner authored books with basic information about karate, intended for students, but these did not qualify as scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided to establish that the Petitioner performed leading or critical roles for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen is dismissed. The motion to reconsider is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought. The motions did not establish that the previous decision was incorrect based on the application of law or policy, nor did they provide new evidence to meet the criteria.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The Petitioner should ensure that all evidence clearly demonstrates the required levels of recognition and impact in his field.
