Date of Decision: January 18, 2017
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Sailing Competitor and Coach
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Awards and Prizes:
The petitioner provided evidence of winning first place in multiple Russian sailing competitions between 2006 and 2011. The media coverage submitted indicated these awards are nationally recognized in her sport, meeting this criterion.
Participation as a Judge:
Evidence was provided of the petitioner’s participation as a sailing judge in various competitions. This included a judging logbook and a supporting letter from the president of the Russian sailing federation, fulfilling this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence showing that the association she was a member of requires outstanding achievements of its members as judged by recognized national or international experts in sailing. The Director’s determination that this criterion was not met was upheld.
Published Material About the Petitioner:
The articles submitted did not meet the regulatory requirements as they were not about the petitioner, lacked author identification, or did not come from major media. This criterion was not satisfied.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s evidence under this criterion was insufficient. The reference letters and awards provided did not demonstrate that her contributions had a significant impact on the field of sailing. General statements from colleagues without specific examples of major significance failed to meet this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner won multiple national sailing competitions in Russia. However, the evidence did not extend beyond national recognition to international acclaim.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The submitted articles were insufficient, either lacking focus on the petitioner or originating from sources that did not qualify as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s coaching methods and theoretical contributions were not substantiated with evidence showing major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s role as a judge in sailing competitions was well-documented and met the required criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The associations cited did not provide evidence that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Supporting Documentation
- Judging Logbook: Detailed entries of the petitioner’s judging activities.
- Letters of Support: Multiple letters from colleagues, which lacked specific examples of significant contributions.
- Media Coverage: Articles and coverage of the petitioner’s competition results.
- Membership Certificates: Documentation of membership in sailing associations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the evidentiary requirements for at least three criteria. The evidence provided, while meeting some criteria, was insufficient in demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may seek additional evidence or consult legal advice for further actions.
