Date of Decision: August 24, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Martial Arts Competitor and Coach
Field: Martial Arts
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards:
The petitioner received lesser nationally and internationally recognized awards for excellence in his field.
Participation as a judge of the work of others:
The petitioner has judged the work of others in his field, demonstrating his expertise and recognition as an authority.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements:
The petitioner did not establish that his memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published material about the petitioner:
The petitioner provided articles about his work, but did not establish that these publications were major trade publications or other major media.
Display of the alien’s work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his participation in events was of an artistic nature or that the events themselves constituted artistic venues.
Leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his roles within various organizations were leading or critical.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his earnings were significantly high compared to others in his field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- Summary of findings: The petitioner received awards but did not demonstrate that they were of national or international significance.
- Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not established that the Prize is nationally or internationally recognized.”
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Summary of findings: The articles provided did not meet the standards for major trade publications or other major media.
- Key quotes or references: “The petitioner has not established that the publications qualify as ‘major.'”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not applicable
Participation as a Judge:
- Summary of findings: The petitioner judged the work of others in his field.
- Key quotes or references: “The petitioner participated as a judge of the work of others, satisfying the criterion.”
Membership in Associations:
- Summary of findings: The memberships did not meet the regulatory requirements for outstanding achievements judged by national or international experts.
- Key quotes or references: “The petitioner has not established that the named associations require outstanding achievements.”
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Summary of findings: The petitioner did not demonstrate leading or critical roles within organizations.
- Key quotes or references: “The petitioner has not established that he has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Summary of findings: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his participation in events was of an artistic nature.
- Key quotes or references: “The record does not demonstrate that the petitioner’s work was displayed at ‘artistic exhibitions or showcases.'”
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Summary of findings: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of high salary or remuneration.
- Key quotes or references: “The petitioner has not established that he commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others in his field.”
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable
Supporting Documentation
- Awards Documentation: Evidence of lesser nationally and internationally recognized awards for excellence.
- Judging Work: Letters confirming the petitioner’s participation as a judge.
- Media Coverage: Articles about the petitioner’s work.
- Memberships: Documentation of memberships in professional associations.
- Salary Data: Evidence of the petitioner’s salary and comparisons to other professionals in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for the EB-1 classification. The documentation lacked necessary details, corroborative evidence, and objective proof of significant contributions to the field. Additionally, the petitioner’s evidence was divided between different fields, which did not collectively establish extraordinary ability in a single, identifiable field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more detailed and comprehensive evidence to support future petitions or appeals.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
