Date of Decision: August 15, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Taekwondo Instructor
Field: Taekwondo and Athletic Training
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner claimed eligibility under four regulatory criteria but satisfied only one, as determined by the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
- The petitioner provided evidence of participation as a judge in taekwondo tournaments and events.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
- The petitioner submitted evidence of medals won at various competitions, but the AAO determined that the awards did not carry national or international recognition within the field of taekwondo.
- Membership in Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievements:
- Memberships in taekwondo organizations, including the Nepal Taekwondo Association, were documented. However, evidence failed to show that these associations required outstanding achievements judged by national or international experts.
- Published Material About the Petitioner:
- Articles submitted from local and regional publications did not meet the regulatory requirements for professional or major trade media, and inconsistencies in publication details were noted.
Key Points from the Decision
Judging Activities:
- The petitioner successfully demonstrated participation as a referee and judge in competitive events, which was sufficient to meet this criterion.
Awards Evidence:
- The AAO found that while the petitioner earned medals at competitions, there was insufficient evidence to establish the significance or recognition of these awards beyond local or regional levels.
Membership Evidence:
- The petitioner’s memberships in organizations like the Nepal Taekwondo Association were not demonstrated to require outstanding achievements, as judged by recognized experts.
Published Material:
- Articles and media coverage were either inadequately substantiated or lacked sufficient circulation data and prominence to satisfy the criterion.
Final Merits Determination Not Reached:
The AAO concluded that the petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria, and a final merits determination was therefore unnecessary.
Supporting Documentation
Judging Evidence: Documentation of referee and judging roles at taekwondo competitions.
Awards Evidence: Certificates, medals, and supporting letters, lacking national or international significance.
Membership Evidence: Records of memberships in taekwondo organizations, insufficient to meet evidentiary standards.
Published Material: Articles and publications, lacking prominence or necessary details.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met one regulatory criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). However, the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of taekwondo.
