Date of Decision: APR. 15, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Powerboat Racer
Field: Racing
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor:
The petitioner provided sufficient documentary evidence regarding his receipt of awards and recognition, including publicity about the award ceremony, meeting the plain language of the regulation.
Criteria Not Met:
- Documentation of the individual’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields:
The petitioner failed to establish that his membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. - Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that the published material met the required standards of being about him or published in recognized major media.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner submitted evidence of awards received, including certificates and publicity about the award ceremony. However, the petitioner did not provide sufficient information to establish the national or international recognition of the awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided two items with certified translations. The first was a single paragraph from an unidentified newspaper about his win, and the second was a brief table of results. Neither article listed the author, which is required by the regulation.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted various documents to support his claim, including award certificates, publicity materials, and published articles. However, many of these documents lacked necessary details or did not meet regulatory requirements.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements and failed to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. Additionally, the petitioner did not establish the level of expertise indicating that he is one of the small percentage who have risen to the very top of his field.
Next Steps: It is recommended that the petitioner review the specific evidentiary requirements and gather more substantial and relevant documentation before reapplying.
