Date of Decision: March 26, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Squash Coach
Field: Squash Coaching and Athletics
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The Beneficiary was part of the winning team for the Interprovincial Team Championship in South Africa. This competition is recognized nationally, and the Beneficiary’s team won multiple times, indicating that she received awards for excellence in her field.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievements:
The evidence provided did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary’s memberships in various squash teams and organizations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published Material About the Alien in Professional or Major Trade Publications:
Although several articles were submitted, the media in which they were published did not qualify as major publications. The articles also did not sufficiently demonstrate the Beneficiary’s sustained national or international acclaim.
Performing in a Leading or Critical Role for Organizations with Distinguished Reputation:
The Beneficiary’s roles were not sufficiently demonstrated to be leading or critical to the organizations’ success. The evidence did not establish that these roles were critical or that the organizations had a distinguished reputation.
High Salary or Remuneration in Relation to Others in the Field:
The Beneficiary’s salary, while above average, did not demonstrate that it was significantly high in relation to other coaches in her field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Beneficiary received awards as part of a team that won the Interprovincial Team Championship in South Africa multiple times. This competition is nationally recognized, fulfilling the criterion for nationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles about the Beneficiary were published in The Peninsula, Woman magazine, and Abode magazine. However, the publications did not qualify as major media, and the articles did not sufficiently establish the Beneficiary’s national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Beneficiary made original contributions of major significance to the field of squash coaching.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable or not sufficiently addressed in the decision.
Membership in Associations:
The Beneficiary’s memberships in various squash teams and organizations did not meet the criterion for requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable or not sufficiently addressed in the decision.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Beneficiary’s roles at various squash clubs and as a coach were not sufficiently demonstrated to be leading or critical to the organizations’ success.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable or not sufficiently addressed in the decision.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Beneficiary’s salary, while above average, did not demonstrate that it was significantly high in relation to other coaches in her field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable or not sufficiently addressed in the decision.
Supporting Documentation
Award Certificates and Letters: Documentation of awards received from the Interprovincial Team Championship in South Africa.
Media Coverage: Articles about the Beneficiary’s achievements in squash coaching, published in The Peninsula, Woman magazine, and Abode magazine.
Reference Letters: Letters from various individuals and organizations confirming the Beneficiary’s roles and achievements in squash coaching.
Salary Documentation: Evidence of the Beneficiary’s salary in comparison to other coaches in her field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Beneficiary did not demonstrate that she met at least three of the evidentiary criteria required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. The evidence provided did not sufficiently establish sustained national or international acclaim or that the Beneficiary was among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering additional evidence to address the deficiencies identified in the decision and reapply or explore alternative immigration options.
