Date of Decision: NOV 23, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Speed Skater and Coach
Field: Athletics
Nationality: [Not provided in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
No criteria were ultimately met as the new evidence provided did not substantiate any of the claimed criteria under the required standards.
Criteria Not Met:
Receipt of Lesser Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner submitted awards received post-dating the filing of the petition, which cannot be considered as they do not meet the requirement of being nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence at the time of filing.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner provided letters and evidence of involvement in speed skating activities. However, these were not sufficient to demonstrate that the contributions were of major significance to the field.
Leading or Critical Role: The evidence provided did not sufficiently establish that the Petitioner held a leading or critical role in an organization with a distinguished reputation. The letters and documents provided post-dated the filing of the petition and did not demonstrate a significant impact on the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Findings: The awards and achievements cited by the Petitioner were received after the filing of the petition and thus could not be considered. Additionally, the awards did not demonstrate national or international recognition for excellence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Findings: The Petitioner’s contributions were not shown to have a major impact on the field of speed skating. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate significant influence or widespread implementation.
Participation as a Judge:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Membership in Associations:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Findings: The Petitioner’s involvement in speed skating clubs and organizations post-dated the petition and did not demonstrate significant impact or leadership within the field.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Findings: Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Reviews: Various articles and reviews about the Petitioner’s achievements and contributions in speed skating.
Recommendation Letters: Letters from colleagues and experts supporting the significance and impact of the Petitioner’s contributions to the field of speed skating.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Motion to Reconsider and Reopen Denied
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time major achievement or at least three of the ten criteria for extraordinary ability. The new evidence provided did not overcome the deficiencies identified in the initial and appellate decisions. The evidence presented did not establish the Petitioner’s sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage who have risen to the very top of his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more robust evidence of his contributions’ significance and potentially reapplying if additional substantial evidence can be presented. Consulting with an immigration attorney for further guidance and preparation may also be beneficial.
