dismissed EB-1A Case: Acrobatic Arts

PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass A\e.. N.W., Rm. 3000 
Wash~ngton. DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
B 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
V 
F~obert P. Wiernann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in the arts, pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1153(b)(l)(A). The director 
determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary 
to quali@ for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a statement and additional exhibits. For the reasons discussed below, 
we concur with the director that the petitioner has not established sustained acclaim. As noted by the 
petitioner on appeal, he came to the United States in October 1998, more than two and a half years 
before filing the petition. The petitioner's move, however, does not waive the requirement of 
demonstrating sustained acclaim in June 2003, when the petition was filed. Thus, in order to establish 
eligibility, the petitioner must demonstrate his current acclaim beyond the local community where he 
now resides. 
Moreover, the petitioner indicated on Part 4 of the petition that he had never been the beneficiary of a 
previous petition. On January 28, 2000, however, the petitioner filed an earlier petition, EAC-00-088- 
5 1423, in his own behalf. The director denied that petition on March 6,2001 and this office denied the 
appeal of that decision on March 28, 2002. The petitioner's failure to acknowledge the filing of the 
earlier petition when asked on the current petition seriously diminishes his overall credibility. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are 
aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with Extraordinary Ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, 
business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or 
international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the 
field through extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry to the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the 
individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien 
has sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise are set 
forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It 
should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that he has sustained national or 
international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as an acrobatic artist. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international 
recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at 
least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. The criteria follow. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
Initially, the petitioner submitted an alleged webpage from the "CULART" website. 
 The page, 
however, does not include a web address. Moreover, the record lacks evidence regarding the individual 
or entity responsible for this site. On appeal, the petitioner concedes that this webpage is his own. 
Thus, the petitioner has not established that this webpage is credible independent evidence of the 
information on the page. 
In his personal statements, the petitioner consistently claims to have won a Silver Clown Award at the 
13'~ Monte Carlo International Circus Festival in "Morocco" in 1988. The petitioner also submitted 
numerous photographs with attached self-serving captions, also attesting to the 1988 festival in 
"Morocco." These manufactured documents do not establish the information alleged in the captions. 
In addition, the petitioner submitted page 49 of an unidentified publication indicating that the Tianjin 
Acrobatics Troupe won a Silver Clown Award at the 13th Monte Carlo festival in "Morocco" in 1987. 
The petitioner submitted a photograph of a Golden Clown statue, but the engraving is illegible. Every 
reference letter, caption, translation and statement by the petitioner asserts that the Monte Carlo festival 
is in Morocco. We take administrative notice of the fact that Monte Carlo is, in fact, in Monaco, not 
Morocco. Thus, the credibility of the petitioner, the publication from which page 49 is copied, the 
translator or the original documents from which the translation is derived and the petitioner's references 
is somewhat diminished. 
The petitioner also submitted a Certificate of Special Honor from the Chinese Ministry of Culture and a 
Certificate of Honor from the Tianjin Bureau of Culture purporting to confirm that the petitioner won 
the Silver Clown and the French Developing Circus Art Association Award at the 13h Monte Carlo 
International Circus Festival. The translation of these certificates indicates that the Silver Clown was 
awarded in Morocco, although we are unable to discern whether that discrepancy is solely an error on 
Page 4 
the part of the translator. The petitioner provides no explanation for relying on a certificate from 
officials in China to document awards in Monaco and France. The petitioner did not submit a 
certificate from the Monte Carlo festival, a photograph of the Silver Clown with a legible inscription or 
a certificate from the French Developing Circus Art Association. 
Finally, the petitioner submitted a newspaper article in the Tianjin Daily reporting that the Tianjin 
Acrobatic Troupe that won the Silver Clown also won a Lu Xun award. Although the article was 
purportedly published in October 1988 and references a 1988 Silver Clown, it reports on a Lu Xun 
award for 1985-1 986. 
All of the above evidence is secondary evidence of the Silver Clown, the French Award and the Lu Xun 
award. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(2) provides that secondary evidence is only acceptable if 
primary evidence, in this case the award certificates themselves, do not exist or are unavailable. The 
petitioner has not established that these awards either do not exist or are unavailable. As such, we do 
not have to accept secondary evidence. Moreover, as stated above, much of the evidence relating to 
this award has somewhat diminished evidentiary weight as it all references Monte Carlo as located in 
Morocco, not Monaco. 
The petitioner did submit primary evidence of some awards. Specifically, the petitioner submitted a 
May 2000 plaque for "Extraordinary Expertise" from the NCBA Culture and Arts Center, the 
petitioner's employer. In addition, the petitioner submitted a certificate from the Organizing 
Committee of the 1997 China (Tianjin) Dragon and Lion Dance Guest Invited Performing Competition 
confirming the issuance of a "Special Award to the petitioner. The petitioner further submitted a 
certificate from the China Acrobatic Artists Association confirming the petitioner's Second Prize of 
Excellent Papers at the 3'd Conference of China Acrobatic Theory Studies in 1994. The petitioner also 
submitted a 1987 Certificate of Award from the Ministry of Culture affirming the petitioner's receipt of 
the Silver Lion Award for the acrobatic program "Leather Straps" at the Chinese 2nd National Acrobatic 
Competition. Finally, the petitioner submitted evidence of youth awards. 
The director concluded that the petitioner's awards were not indicative of sustained acclaim in 2003 
when the petition was filed. The director further concluded that the most significant award, the Silver 
Lion was issued to the petitioner's entire troupe. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the director 
failed to consider his Silver Clown and French awards and that the petitioner was subsequently invited 
to perform with Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a videotape of a performance at the Monte Carlo festival, concluding 
with the troupe being handed a Silver Clown. Once again, this tape is secondary evidence of the Silver 
Clown. The petitioner has still not submitted the actual certificate he received from the Monte Carlo 
festival or the French award. The petitioner has not demonstrated that he received these awards. 
Moreover, the petitioner claims to have won these awards in 1988, 15 years prior to the date he filed the 
petition. Thus, they are not evidence of sustained acclaim in 2003. 
The petitioner's plaque, awarded in 2000, is from his own employer. 
 The petitioner has not 
demonstrated that this plaque is a nationally recognized award that the top acrobats nationally aspire to 
win. The petitioner has not demonstrated the significance of his other awards, some of which are 
limited by age and all of which date from 1997 or earlier. Thus, they predate the petition by six years or 
more. Finally, a job with Ringling Brothers, while competitive, is not an award or prize. 
In light of the above, we concur with the director that the petitioner's prizes and awards are not 
indicative of sustained national or international acclaim in 2003. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classijication is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
The petitioner submitted a certificate from the China Tianjin Acrobatic Artists Association asserting 
that the petitioner has been a "professional member" of the China Acrobatic Artists Association. The 
petitioner's webpage states that the petitioner "has made important contribution to the development of 
Chinese Acrobatic and Circus Shows. Due to his special contribution to the acrobatic art performing, 
he was a professional member of [the] China Acrobatic Artists Association in 1987." The petitioner 
also submitted evidence of judging, artist and coach appointments, which is better considered under the 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and (viii) respectively. 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated that the association requires 
outstanding achievements of its members. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that this conclusion is not 
true and references the claim on his own webpage. The petitioner's own webpage, however, is self- 
serving and cannot serve as independent evidence of the association's membership requirements. The 
petitioner has not submitted the official bylaws for the association, listing the precise membership 
requirements. As such, we cannot evaluate those requirements. Moreover, the petitioner has implied 
that he was only a member of the Tianjin chapter, suggesting that recognized national or international 
experts in the field did not judge his membership eligibility. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Published materials 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. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The petitioner submitted numerous newspaper articles, most of which are about the Tianjin Acrobatic 
Troupe as a whole and do not feature the petitioner individually. Of the articles that do feature the 
petitioner, they appear local to Tianjin or in Chinese-language U.S. newspapers. The director 
concluded that the published materials submitted were not about the petitioner, but his troupe. On 
appeal, the petitioner references four articles submitted that discuss him personally, three of which 
appear in the Tianjin Daily and one of which appears in the China Press, a U.S. Chinese-language 
publication. 
Tianjin Daily appears to be a local Tianjin paper. Without evidence that the paper enjoys a significant 
national distribution, we cannot conclude that it constitutes major media. In addition, a newspaper 
printed in a language the majority of the population cannot comprehend is not major media. Thus, 
while we agree that some of the published materials are about the petitioner, those materials do not 
appear in major media. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets 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 alliedfield of specEfication for which classiJication is sought. 
The petitioner submitted invitations to judge the 2nd Wuhan International Acrobatic Festival in 1996 
and the 5th China Wuqiao International Acrobatic and Circus Festival in 1993. The petitioner also 
submitted certificates appointing him as a judge for the 3rd China XingMiao Trophy Acrobatic 
Performing Competition in 1997 and the 4" China Golden Lion Award Acrobatic Performing 
Competition. The director acknowledged this evidence, but noted that the beneficiary only judged the 
work of others in the "early- to mid- 1990s." On appeal, the petitioner notes that he last judged the 
work of others in 1997, "only a year before [he] came to the United States." 
At issue is not whether the petitioner is able to provide evidence relating to a given criterion before 
entering the United States, but whether he enjoys national or international acclaim as of the date of 
filing, in this case June 2003. The evidence submitted to meet this criterion does not establish such 
acclaim. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientiJic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signzficance in the field. 
The petitioner initially relied on his international performances to meet this criterion. The petitioner 
also submitted reference letters from members of the field and officials in China and Queens in New 
York City. The record includes little objective information about the significance of the entities in 
Queens. The director concluded that the petitioner had not established that he had made any original 
contributions to the field of acrobatics that had been recognized by independent members of the field. 
On appeal, the petitioner asserts that his reference letters establish his contributions and submits 
additional letters on appeal. 
The opinions of experts in the field, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a 
successful claim of sustained national or international acclaim. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (CIS) may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert 
testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm. 1988). However, CIS 
is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the 
benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive 
evidence of eligibility; CIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support the 
alien's eligibility. See id. at 795-796. CIS may even give less weight to an opinion that is not 
corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way questionable. Id. at 795; See also 
Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of 
California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). In evaluating the reference letters, we note that 
letters containing mere assertions of widespread acclaim and vague claims of contributions are less 
persuasive than letters that specifically identify contributions and provide specific examples of how 
those contributions have influenced the field. 
Vice Chairman of the Tianjin Acrobatic Association, asserts that while judging a 
competition where the petitioner was competing, the petitioner was the first individual to complete a 
difficult somersault in his specialty. Other references affirm that this feat took place in 1978 at a youth 
competition. A 1986 article in the local Tianjin Daily reports that the petitioner's somersault is "a new 
innovation." Ms.further asserts that the petitioner's "Leather Straps" routine was recognized in 
the media as bringing a "revolution to the acrobatic circus." The other references from China provide 
similar information, attesting to the prior success of the petitioner's "Leather Straps" routine, which he 
apparently has not performed since returning to the United States in 1998. 
President and Artistic Director of the CBA Culture and Arts Center in Elmhurst, New 
York (in Queens), asserts that sinc 
 ving in the United States in 1998, the petitioner has been 
performing the "Lion Dance." Mr. Mi asserts that the peti 
IYY 
has performed this dance in many 
states in the United States although the only examples Mr. 
 provides are New Jersey and New 
York. The record contains no confirmation from ABC that the petitioner performed on Good Morning 
America as claimed by ~r While some references assert that the petitioner performed during an 
NBA basketball games, the Chinese-language newspaper article on the performance indicates the Lion 
- - - - 
Dance was 
 by Dance Beijing. The petitioner has not demonstrated any connection between 
himself and Dance Beij' 
 rd contains no confirmation from the NBA of the petitioner's 
purported performance. 
 Executive Director Tung Ching Chinese Center for the Arts in 
Fresh Meadows, New Y*ens) an ~irector of the Performing Arts Division of 
A.R.T.S. in New York, provide similar information. a magician who lists no address or 
other contact information on her letter, asserts that also performed the Lion Dance in 
Connecticut and Boston. The record contains programs for performances at cultural festivals and 
letters and newspaper articles confirming performances at libraries and schools in New York, New 
Jersey and Pennsylvania. Finally, the new letters on appeal are from individuals in New York City and 
provide similar information. 
Although several of the references with no connection to Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey 
Circus attest to the petitioner's performances with that circus in the late 19807s, the only evidence 
submitted to confirm these assertions is a circus identification for the petitioner and photographs. The 
record lacks a copy of the petitioner's contract and letters from officials at Ringling Brothers 
confirming the nature of the petitioner's participation. 
According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3)(v), an alien's contributions must be not only 
original but of major significance. We must presume that the phrase "major significance" is not 
superfluous and, thus, that it has some meaning. To be considered a contribution of major 
significance in acrobatics, it can be expected that the evidence would clearly demonstrate the 
petitioner's impact in the field. While the petitioner has entertained crowds and gained recognition 
in the local Tianjin press and the local Queens Chinese-language press, he has not demonstrated his 
influence in the field such that his routine is being emulated by other acrobatic troupes. For 
example, the petitioner has not established that he is nationally or internationally credited with 
inventing the concept behind the Leather Strap routine or Lion Dance or that he is nationally or 
internationally credited with adding influential elements to these routines. Thus, the petitioner has not 
established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien S authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
As discussed above, the petitioner submitted his 1994 Second Prize of Excellent Papers. The petitioner 
did not submit the paper itself. As such, the petitioner has not established that it was published in a 
professional or major trade publication or other major media. Moreover, the prize is from 1994, nine 
years prior to the date of filing. As such, it is not evidence of sustained acclaim. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
In his initial statement, the petitioner did not specifically claim to meet this criterion although he listed 
several performances as "displays." The director concluded that the petitioner has met this criterion. 
This criterion, however, is applicable to the visual arts. The petitioner is a performing artist. It is 
inherent to this occupation to perform. Not every performance is an artistic exhibition or showcase. As 
stated above, the record contains no confirmation from ABC regarding the petitioner's purported 
appearance on Good Morning America or from the NBA regarding the petitioner's purported 
performance during an NBA basketball game. The letters, newspaper articles and programs document 
that the petitioner's recent performances have been mostly limited to local cultural festivals at venues 
with little national recognition. Thus, the evidence submitted to meet this criterion is not indicative of 
or consistent with the petitioner's claim to currently enjoy national or international acclaim. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated a leading or critical role within the 
troupes with which he performed. On appeal, the petitioner submits a video of the "Leather Straps" 
performance at the Monte Carlo festival. He asserts that this video establishes that each acrobat 
displayed expertise consistent with performing at the very top of the field. The petitioner's analysis is 
not persuasive. Nothing in the language at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3)(viii) suggests that mere association 
with a reputable entity is sufficient. In order to meet this criterion, the petitioner must establish that he 
was hired or selected for a role that is leading or critical in comparison with the other roles for the 
organization, such as team captain. 
Vice Chairman and Secretary General of the Shanghai Athlete Association, asserts that 
in a leading role for the Tianjin Acrobatic Troupe. A "Letter of Certification" 
from the China Tianjin Acrobatic Troupe indicates that the petitioner had a "leading acrobatic 
performance" in the Leather Strap routine. Hou Quangeng, President of the Tianjin Acrobatic Troupe, 
also asserts that the petitioner "was employed as a leading acrobatic and circus shows [sic] by [the 
Tianjin Acrobatic Troupe." The Leather Strap routine did gamer media attention in the local Tianjin 
paper and the troupe at least performed at the Monte Carlo Festival in 1988. The petitioner has not 
established, however, that he was selected for a role within the troupe that set him apart from the others. 
Several references also refer to the petitioner's leading role in the Lion Dance. The record lacks 
evidence that the petitioner has performed with this troupe outside of the Northeastern United States. 
Most of the performances appear to be at Chinese or Asian cultural festivals. Thus, the petitioner has 
not established that his Lion Dance troupe enjoys a distinguished reputation nationally. 
Finally, the petitioner submitted appointment letters appointing him as a "First-rank Acrobatic Artist" 
for the CBA Culture and Art Center in New York and as a "First-rank Acrobatic Artist and Coach" for 
the 
 n New York. The record contains no evidence that either organization 
enj nationally. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signijkantly high remuneration for 
services, in relation to others in thejeld. 
On appeal, the petitioner does not contest the director's conclusion that the record lacks evidence 
relating to this criterion. We concur with the director. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofJice receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
While the petitioner initially asserted that he met this criterion, on appeal he does not contest the 
director's failure to address this criterion. We find that the record lacks box office receipts for shows 
where the petitioner is prominently featured in the promotional materials and, thus, can be considered 
responsible fort the show's success. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate 
that the alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small percentage 
who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
Review of the record, however, does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself as an 
acrobat to such an extent that he may be said to have achieved sustained national or international 
acclaim or to be within the small percentage at the very top of his field. The evidence indicates that the 
petitioner showed talent as an acrobat, but is not persuasive that the petitioner's recent achievements set 
him significantly above almost all others in his field. Therefore, the petitioner has not established 
eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the petition may not be approved. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal 
will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.