Date of Decision: January 24, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Weightlifter
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Georgian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Prizes or Awards:
The Petitioner demonstrated he received several nationally recognized awards for weightlifting, including winning first place in significant competitions.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner claimed membership in a weightlifting team and holding a vocational diploma from a weightlifting institution. However, the provided documentation did not define the outstanding achievements required for membership or the judging criteria by recognized national or international experts.
Participation as a Judge:
The Director initially determined the Petitioner met this criterion. However, upon further review, it was concluded that the Petitioner’s role as a referee did not equate to judging the work of others in the field, as it primarily involved enforcing competition rules.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner submitted newspaper articles about his accomplishments. However, the publications were not established as major media, lacking sufficient circulation statistics to support this assertion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner provided recommendation letters praising his weightlifting skills and awards. However, the letters did not specify any original contributions of major significance that have been widely implemented or remarkably impacted the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner received several nationally recognized awards for weightlifting, demonstrating his excellence in the field. However, this alone was insufficient to meet the other criteria.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The submitted articles highlighted the Petitioner’s accomplishments but did not provide sufficient evidence of being major media publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Letters from experts praised the Petitioner’s achievements but did not demonstrate significant contributions that impacted the field of weightlifting.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner’s role as a referee in weightlifting competitions was not equated to judging the work of others in the same or allied field.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various documents, including letters from recognized experts, newspaper articles, and evidence of awards. However, these documents failed to meet the evidentiary criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed. The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner’s documentation did not satisfy the plain language requirements of the criteria. The evidence provided was either insufficient or did not clearly establish the Petitioner’s extraordinary ability in the field of weightlifting.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner should consider gathering more comprehensive evidence that clearly meets the criteria, including detailed documentation of significant contributions to the field, major media publications, and verifiable evidence of judging the work of others.
