Date of Decision: February 26, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Racehorse Jockey
Field: Horse Racing
Nationality: Venezuelan
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
High remuneration for services: The Petitioner demonstrated that his earnings were high relative to others in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The Petitioner did not establish that he received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his field.
Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements: The Petitioner did not demonstrate membership in any association that required outstanding achievements.
Published material about the alien in professional or major media: The Petitioner did not show that the media coverage he received constituted major trade publications or other major media.
Display at artistic exhibitions or showcases: The Petitioner did not establish that his participation in horse races constituted an artistic display or exhibition.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that he held a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner was the “Meet Leader” at a racetrack in 2016 but did not show that this recognition was nationally or internationally recognized.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not established that he received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his field of endeavor.”
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner submitted several articles, but many did not focus on him or were not from major trade publications.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not shown that the submitted evidence satisfies the regulatory criterion.”
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not demonstrate membership in associations that require outstanding achievements.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not satisfied the requirements of this criterion.”
Authorship of scholarly articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or critical role performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his roles were leading or critical within distinguished organizations.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner did not establish how his roles resulted in widespread acclaim from his field.”
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner’s participation in horse races was not shown to be an artistic display or exhibition.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner has not established that a horse race is an artistic display or exhibition.”
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner demonstrated high earnings relative to others in his field.
Key quotes or references: “The Petitioner documented his income, but it was not shown to be high relative to others at the very top of his field.”
Commercial successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Income Documentation: Evidence of high earnings from horse racing.
Media Coverage: Several articles, but many did not focus on the Petitioner or were not from major trade publications.
Professional Participation: Photographs and records of race participation, but these did not constitute artistic displays.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal dismissed.
Reasoning: 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 evidence provided did not support the level of recognition and influence required for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification.
Next Steps
Recommendations: The Petitioner may consider gathering more robust and independent evidence of his sustained impact and significance within the field, securing credible letters of support, and reapplying with a stronger case.
