Date of Decision: October 30, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Pole Fitness Performer
Field: Pole and Aerial Sport
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner sought to meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) concluded that the petitioner satisfied three criteria; however, the evidence failed to establish sustained acclaim or that the petitioner was among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Criteria Met:
- Prizes or Awards:
- The petitioner demonstrated receipt of prizes from competitions with national and international titles.
- Judging the Work of Others:
- Evidence of serving as a judge in pole fitness competitions was provided and found sufficient to meet this criterion.
- Display of Work at Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Performances in high-profile exhibitions and showcases in the field of pole fitness were documented and accepted under this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
- Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Letters described the petitioner’s techniques as influential but lacked evidence of field-wide recognition or major significance.
- Published Material About the Petitioner:
- Media coverage about the petitioner’s achievements did not meet the evidentiary requirements of national or international acclaim.
- Membership in Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievements:
- Memberships in relevant organizations were documented but did not meet the evidentiary standard for requiring outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Key Points from the Decision
Prizes and Awards:
- While the petitioner received awards from competitions, evidence failed to demonstrate the competitions or their accolades were nationally or internationally recognized.
Judging Evidence:
- Service as a judge in competitions was sufficient to meet the standard, though it did not demonstrate the required sustained acclaim in the field.
Contribution Evidence:
- The petitioner’s contributions to pole fitness techniques were acknowledged but lacked evidence of field-wide adoption or acclaim.
Final Merits Determination:
- Despite meeting three criteria, the AAO concluded that the totality of the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the very top in her field.
Supporting Documentation
Prizes Evidence: Awards from competitions with insufficient evidence of their national or international recognition.
Judging Evidence: Documentation of judging activities in pole fitness competitions.
Exhibition Evidence: Records of participation in prominent showcases and exhibitions in the field.
Contribution Evidence: Letters of support highlighting contributions, lacking corroborative evidence of major significance.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
While the petitioner met three regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), the evidence failed to demonstrate the sustained acclaim or extraordinary ability required for EB-1 classification.
