dismissed EB-1A Case: Art And Design

U.S. Depadmerat of Homdawd Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., IPm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U So Citizenship 
md Immigration 
, -_.*,g: C,i?'.: .l/r;">T&- 
I ,,<\ :i ?, q ! ,, ,. L;? ( ,, .:- . ! ~*'i:~d:-&* \.-, 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: I.-- - 
L+& a ;&& ti.. 
E.*:9v, -8 
SRC $5 001 5 1206 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETRION: Emmigrant Petition for' Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203($)(1)(A) sf the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 B 153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BE OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. ABF documents have been returned to 
the office that o~igiaaally decided yom case. Any fuflher inquiry must be made to that office. 
7~obe1-t P. Wiemann, Director 
/ 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based grant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Selwlce 
Center, and 3s now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b>(1)(A) of the 
Inmnigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 ll§3($)(4)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established that she qualifies for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
Secf on 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall fist be made available . . . to qualified idgrants who are aliens 
described in my of the following subpapagrapbs (A) though (C): 
(A> Miens with Extraordinary Ability. -- h alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, rsr 
awetics which has been deneonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim 
and whose achievements have been recognized in the field though extensive 
documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
Qiii) the alien's entry to the United States will substantially benefit I~H-ospectively the 
United States. 
As used in this section, the tern "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the 
iHncZividuaP is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
8 20d.§(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has sustained 
national or lnternationa1 acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise are set forth in the regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that 
the petitioner must show that she has emed sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on October 1,2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as 
an "Artist, Designer? Consultant." The statute and reguPations require the petitioner's acclaim to be sustained. 
The record reflects that the petitioner has been residing in the United States since 1999. Given the length of 
time between the peritionex's arrival in the United States anen$ the petition's filing date, it is reasonable to 
expect the petitioner to have earned national accHaim in the United States during that time. The petitioner has 
had ample time ro establish a reputation in this country. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 2(94.5(4-a)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim though evidence sf a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized 
award). Baring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at least thee of which 
must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Boceanzentation ofthe alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationaEly ~-ecognizedprdzes or 
awardsfor excellence in thefield ofeazdeavor~ 
The petitioner submitted a "Ceriificate of Honor" issued by the '7i Ein Province Public Go~ernment'~ in 1999 
stating that she was "awarded the Silver Prize in the Fomh Session in Ti Lin Province Artistic Festival." 
The petitioner also submitted a certificate issued by the "Ii Ein hovinamce the First Session Artistic Festival OPce" 
in 1989 stating that she was "awarded the First Prize of Arts in Ji Ein Province the First Session Artistic Festivak." 
The preceding awads reflect provincial recognition rather than national or international recognition. 
Fdemore, pmsuant to 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(b)(3), any document containing foreign language submitted to 
Citizenship and gration Services (CIS) shall be accompanied by a full English language translation that 
the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the trans8ato~'s certification that he or she is 
competent to translate from the foreign language into English. The translations accompanying the petitioner's 
award certificates were not certified as required by the regulation. 
On appeal the petitione~ submits a "Ceflificate of Monof' issued by "The Business Department of the 
People's Republic of China9' stating that her "book Korean Clothing Line Collection have [sic] received the 
honor of Outstanding Business-Art Publishing of 1995." 
The petitioner also sub~ts a "Certificate of Honor" issued by "'The 1991 National Volunteer Associaldon of 
China" stating that she "received the honorary title of Outstanding Volunteer of China." 
There is no evidence of publicity sumoimding the petitioner's receipt of the preceding awards or evidence 
showing that they enjoy a significant levei of recognition. I[ra this case, the record contains no supporting 
documentation from the awarding entitles or print media to establish that the petitioner's awards are 
nationally recognized awards for artistic excellence. Furthemre, the translations accompanying the awards 
submitted on appeal were not certified as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.W. 5 103.2(b)(3). 
Hw addition to the above deficiencies, the record contains no evidence showing that the petitioner has won any 
significant awards subsequent to 1999. The absence af such awards indicates that the petitioner has not 
sustained whatever acclaim she aay have earned in China during the 1990's. 
Documerztation of the alien's membenhip 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. 
h order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion, the petitioner must show that 
the association requires outstanding achievement as an essential corndition for admission to membership. 
Membership requirements based on employment or activity in a given field, minimum education or 
experience, standardized test scores, grade point average, recornendations by colleagues or current 
members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion as such requirements do not constitute outstanding 
achievements. h addition, it is clear from the regulatory language that members must be selected at the 
national or international level, rather than the local or regional lever. Therefore, membership in an association 
that evaluates its membership applications at the local or regional chapter Bevel would not qualify. Finally, 
the ovaa81 prestige of a given association is not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements 
rather than the association's overall reputation. 
The petitioner submitted a document identifying her as a member of the "Yan Ji Province Song and Dance 
Ensemble." 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a "Letter of Appointment" indicating that she served as a "Consultant of the 
Development and Refom Association of China." 
The record, however, does not include the membership bylaws or official admission requirements for the 
preceding organizations. There is no indication that admission to membership in these organizations required 
outstanding achievement or that the petitioner was evaluated by national or international experts in 
consideration of her admission to membership. 
Evidence ofthe alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted what she alleges is evidence of her authorship of an article entitled "The Nation in 
White" in Cultural Apparel. The translation accompanying this a-ticle was not certified as required by the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2(b)('%). Furthemore, there is no evidence showing that this article was actually 
published under the petitioner's name or evidence of its significant national or international distribution. Nor 
is there supporting evidence showing that the petitioner's article is viewed thoughout her field as 
significantly influential. 
As noted previously, the petitioner's appellate s~baaaission includes a "Certificate of Honor9' issued by "The 
Business Department of the People's Republic of China" stating that her "book Korean Clothing Line 
Collection have [sic] received the honor of Outstanding Business-kt Publishing of 1995." Aside from this 
certificate, however, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner actenaily published this book. For 
example, the petitioner has not provided the book itself or photocopies of its cover page and relevant portions 
of its text. Nor is there any evidence ofthe book's substantial national readership. 
h this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she meets at least thee sf the cfiteHda that must be 
satisfied to establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify as an dien of 
extraordinary ability. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself to such an extent that she my 
be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be with the small percentage at ihe 
vexy top of her field. The evidence is not persuasive that the petitioner's achievements set her significantly above 
almost all others in her field at a national or international level. Therefore, the petitioner has not established 
eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(B)(A) of the Act and the petition may not be approved. 
Beyond the decision of the director, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(5) requires "cclear evidence that the 
alien is coming to the United States to continue work in the area of expertise. Such evidence may include 
lette~(s) from prospective employer(s), evidence of prearranged codtmeasts such as comacts, or a 
statement from the beneficiary detailing plans on how he or she intends to continue his or her work in the 
United States." The August 27, 2004 letter accompanying the peftisn does not adequately detail how the 
petitioner intends to continue her work in the United States. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial decision. See 
Spencer Enterprises, lac. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, I043 (ED. Cal. 2801), afd. 345 P.3d 483 
(9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. IS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 Q2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the A88 reviews 
appeals on a de novo basis). 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent md 
alternative basis far denial. Ib visa petition proceedings, the burden sf proving eligibility for the benefit 
sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The apped is dismissed.