Date of Decision: January 24, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Weightlifter
Field: Athletics (Weightlifting)
Nationality: [Nationality Not Provided]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor.
The Petitioner submitted evidence of competing in six events listed by the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF). However, some of the results were disqualified, which impacts the validity of his achievements. Despite this, the Director found that the Petitioner met this criterion.
Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specification for which classification is sought.
The Petitioner served as a referee at several national-level weightlifting tournaments, including roles as a “chief judge” or “chief referee,” indicating a level of authority beyond simple rule enforcement.
Criteria Not Met:
Documentation of the alien’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields.
The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his membership in the [Association Name] required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought
The publications provided did not meet the required standards of significant national or international distribution, and some lacked necessary author identification.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field.
The Petitioner did not provide evidence that his contributions were of major significance. Disqualified results from competitions and lack of widespread impact of his techniques were noted.
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.
The Petitioner did not specify or provide evidence of a leading or critical role in the submitted letters and background information.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner presented evidence of competing in multiple international events, but the disqualifications and lack of documented recent achievements diminished the validity of these claims.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles from Georgian newspapers with limited circulation and unspecified authors did not qualify as major media. A survey to establish the significance of these publications was not considered reliable.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s techniques were mentioned by a coach but lacked specific details and evidence of their impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner’s roles as a referee and chief judge at national tournaments were acknowledged as meeting the criterion for judging.
Membership in Associations:
The evidence provided did not establish that the Petitioner’s membership in the association required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
No evidence was provided to establish that the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for any organization.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Letters from [Association/Club Name]:
Attesting to the Petitioner’s participation and roles in various competitions.
Printouts from IWF and other websites:
Showing competition results, including disqualifications.
Articles from Georgian newspapers:
Profiles and interviews with the Petitioner, lacking necessary author details and significant circulation.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not submit the required initial evidence of a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. The lack of credibility due to undisclosed disqualifications further impacted the decision.
Next Steps:
Any future filings must fully account for the Petitioner’s suspension from international competition and explain how national or international acclaim has been maintained despite significant disciplinary actions.
