Date of Decision: March 13, 2015
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Director of Junior High Performance
Field: Athletics (Tennis Coaching)
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner submitted several reference letters claiming that the beneficiary’s lesson plans were utilized by the USTA’s Fair Play System and benefited national coaches and players. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that the lesson plans were original or significantly impacted the sport of tennis as a whole. The reference letters were primarily conclusory and lacked specific evidence of the lesson plans’ impact.
Criteria Not Met
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The beneficiary received a Coach of the Year Award from the USTA, which was regional and not nationally or internationally recognized. Additionally, the award postdated the petition filing and thus could not be considered.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence showing the beneficiary’s duties or the impact of his roles at the petitioning tennis center or USTA. The evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that the beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputations.
Key Points from the Decision
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The beneficiary’s original contributions, such as lesson plans used by USTA, were not sufficiently demonstrated to be of major significance. The reference letters provided were mostly conclusory without specific evidence of the lesson plans’ impact.
Leading or Critical Role
The evidence did not sufficiently establish the beneficiary’s leading or critical role at the petitioning tennis center or USTA. Specific details of his duties and their impact were lacking.
Supporting Documentation
- Reference Letters: The letters praised the beneficiary’s coaching abilities but lacked specific examples of original contributions or significant impact on the sport.
- USTA Documentation: Provided evidence of the beneficiary’s association with USTA, but did not demonstrate nationally or internationally recognized achievements.
- Employment Contract: Showed the beneficiary’s role as Director of Junior High Performance but did not detail his impact or critical role in the organization.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to provide evidence meeting the criteria of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes, original contributions of major significance, and leading or critical roles. The documentation did not demonstrate that the beneficiary achieved sustained national or international acclaim or was among the small percentage at the top of his field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may file a motion to reconsider or reopen the decision with new evidence or arguments.
Download the Full Petition Review Here.
