Date of Decision: September 24, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Swimmer
Field: Sports
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Awards and Prizes: The Petitioner satisfied the criteria for awards under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), demonstrating recognition through awards received.
Memberships in associations: The Petitioner met the membership criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) by providing evidence of memberships in associations that require outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published Material: The Petitioner fulfilled the published material criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) by providing articles about her in major media.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field of swimming.
Participation as a Judge: No evidence was provided to demonstrate participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner did not submit any scholarly articles or publications that contributed to the field.
Leading or Critical Role: The evidence provided did not adequately establish the Petitioner’s roles as leading or critical for the organizations’ overall success.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: No evidence was provided to demonstrate that her salary was significantly high relative to others in her field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable, as the Petitioner’s field does not involve commercial successes in the performing arts.
Key Points from the Decision
The petitioner failed to demonstrate eligibility under the required criteria for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in sports. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) upheld the Director’s decision, noting that the petitioner did not provide the necessary documentation to meet the stringent requirements of the category. The evidence submitted did not show sustained national or international acclaim nor did it place the petitioner at the very top of the field of endeavor.
Supporting Documentation
The record included submissions regarding awards, membership in sports associations, and published materials about the petitioner’s work, but these did not meet the necessary standards to substantiate the claims of extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motions to reconsider and reopen were denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not demonstrate that the Administrative Appeals Office incorrectly applied law or policy in their decision, nor did she provide new facts or evidence to establish that she fulfilled at least three of the evidentiary criteria for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider gathering more robust and relevant evidence that clearly demonstrates sustained national or international acclaim and significant contributions to the field of swimming.
