Date of Decision: February 10, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
- Profession: Martial Artist
- Field: Martial Arts
- Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
- Initial Decision: Denied
- Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- No criteria were met as per the provided document.
Criteria Not Met:
- The record did not establish that the Petitioner had satisfied at least three of ten initial evidentiary criteria, as required.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- No specific awards or prizes were mentioned as evidence for the petition.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- There were no findings or key quotes provided to support this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- No substantial original contributions were documented or referenced in the decision.
Participation as a Judge:
- No participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization was evidenced.
Membership in Associations:
- The decision did not document any membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- There were no scholarly articles authored by the Petitioner presented as evidence.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- The record did not demonstrate any leading or critical role performed by the Petitioner for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- No artistic exhibitions or showcases were documented.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- No evidence of high salary or remuneration in relation to others in the field was provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- There were no commercial successes documented in the performing arts related to the Petitioner.
Supporting Documentation
- Statement: The Petitioner submitted a statement identical to the one provided with the fifth motion, asserting eligibility for first preference classification. However, this statement did not provide new evidence or address errors in previous decisions.
- Affidavits or Other Documentary Evidence: None provided with the motion to reopen or reconsider.
Conclusion
- Final Determination: Denied
- Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to provide new facts or documentary evidence to support the motion to reopen and did not establish any errors in the previous decision for the motion to reconsider. The petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence.
- Next Steps: It is recommended that the Petitioner carefully review prior decisions and understand the evidentiary deficiencies highlighted. For future filings, the Petitioner should gather comprehensive documentation addressing each evidentiary criterion required for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification.
