Date of Decision: May 27, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Taekwondo Athlete and Trainer
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others: The Petitioner actively participated in judging regional and international Taekwondo competitions.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner provided a summary list of national and international tournament victories, but failed to provide sufficient evidence such as award certificates, photographs of medals, or official event results to establish that these awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field of Taekwondo.
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in the Kazakhstan National Taekwondo Team but did not provide sufficient evidence that this membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The Petitioner provided articles that mentioned his work but did not sufficiently demonstrate that these articles were published in major trade or professional publications or other major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The letters provided did not sufficiently detail the nature or impact of the Petitioner’s contributions, failing to demonstrate that these contributions have been widely implemented or have significantly influenced the field.
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that his roles were leading or critical for distinguished organizations. The letters lacked detail on the Petitioner’s impact on the organizations’ outcomes and did not establish the organizations’ distinguished reputations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that the awards listed are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field. Documentation such as award certificates, photographs of medals, and official event results were missing.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The articles provided did not sufficiently establish that they were published in major trade or professional publications or other major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The letters provided did not sufficiently detail the major significance of the Petitioner’s contributions in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner actively participated in judging regional and international Taekwondo competitions, satisfying this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that the membership in the Kazakhstan National Taekwondo Team required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate playing a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Supporting Documentation
Award Materials: Provided but did not establish national or international recognition.
Articles and Publications: Did not meet the required standards for major media coverage.
Letters from Colleagues and Organizations: Praised the Petitioner’s work but lacked sufficient detail to demonstrate major significance or critical roles.
Salary Documentation: Insufficient for establishing high remuneration.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met one criterion but did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not provide the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. The record does not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
