Date of Decision: September 18, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Wrestler
Field: Athletics
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
1. Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field:
The petitioner demonstrated receipt of lesser nationally and internationally recognized awards for excellence in wrestling tournaments and championships.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in associations in the field that require outstanding achievements of their members:
The petitioner claimed membership in the Ukrainian national wrestling team. However, the provided evidence did not show that the membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media:
The petitioner submitted various articles and screenshots. Most were about wrestling tournaments rather than the petitioner himself. The few articles about the petitioner did not meet the criterion as they lacked necessary details such as the author’s name or the publications were not established as major media.
Evidence of participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field:
The petitioner provided evidence of being a referee at wrestling competitions. However, the duties of a referee were not sufficiently demonstrated to equate to the regulatory criterion of judging the work of others.
Evidence of a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with a distinguished reputation:
While the petitioner was a member of the Ukrainian national wrestling team, the evidence did not demonstrate that he performed in a leading or critical role. The documentation did not show his contributions were significantly important to the team’s overall success.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner provided evidence of receiving awards in wrestling tournaments. However, these awards were not recognized as major, internationally acclaimed awards required for a one-time achievement under the EB1 criteria.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The submitted materials were mostly about wrestling tournaments, not about the petitioner specifically. The few relevant articles did not establish the publications as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
This criterion was not claimed or evidenced sufficiently in the document.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s role as a referee was not equated to judging the work of others, as required by the criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The membership in the Ukrainian national wrestling team was not demonstrated to require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
This criterion was not claimed or evidenced in the document.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s role in the Ukrainian national wrestling team was not sufficiently demonstrated to be leading or critical.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
This criterion was not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
This criterion was not claimed or evidenced in the document.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
This criterion was not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Reference Letters: Included praise from coaches but lacked specifics on how the petitioner’s achievements were recognized by the associations.
Articles and Screenshots: Provided some coverage of the petitioner but did not meet the regulatory requirements for major media.
Certificates and Credentials: Included evidence of referee duties but lacked sufficient documentation to equate these duties with judging the work of others.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria required for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the petitioner’s direct and significant contributions to the field of wrestling.
Next Steps: The petitioner may need to gather more substantial and specific evidence linking his contributions directly to significant achievements and consider reapplying with stronger documentation.
