dismissed EB-1A Case: Arts

identiPying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privac) 
U.S. Department of .Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PUBLIC COPY 
FILE: WAC 05 233 52392 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Lmmlgration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
; -k&Robeit P. Wiemann, Chef 
*? Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant 
visa petition, whch is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
According to the petition as initially filed, 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. 5 1 153(b)(l)(A). The director determined the petitioner had not established the 
sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel asserted that the decision is general and does not address the specific evidence in 
this matter. Counsel further asserted that the director failed to consider the petitioner's achievements in 
separate occupations. Counsel indicated that he would submit a brief andlor additional materials to this 
office within 30 days. Counsel dated that appeal July 13, 2006. As of June 7, 2007, this office had 
received nothing fbrther. Thus, on that date, this office contacted counsel by facsimile, advising that 
we had received no additional materials, inquiring as to whether anything had been submitted and 
requesting a copy of any additional materials submitted. The facsimile requested a response within five 
business days. As of this date, approximately two weeks later, this office has received no response. 
Thus, the appeal will be adjudicated based on counsel's initial statements and the evidence of record. 
Contrary to counsel's assertion on appeal, the director addressed several specific pieces of evidence and 
discussed the petitioner's field and specific accomplishments on more than one occasion. Thus, while 
some of the language, such as the statement about attendance at conferences, does not appear to relate 
to the petitioner, the decision is not limited to boilerplate language unrelated to the facts in this matter. 
For the reasons discussed below, we uphold the director's ultimate finding of ineligibility. We note 
that the petitioner must demonstrate his individual acclaim, we will not presume such acclaim by 
association. 
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 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 3 
(iii) the alien's entry to the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) 
have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals seeking 
immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-9 (November 29, 
1991). 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. 
According to Part 6 of the petition, the petitioner seeks classification as an alien with extraordinary 
ability as an "actor/director." The nontechnical description of the job is to act and direct martial arts 
films/television shows and pursue a musical career in the United States. The petitioner submitted a 
"Co-Production Agreement Contract" between the petitioner for Pearl Start Pictures and the Los 
Angeles Acting Academy for the production of "The Life of the Notorious Thief," to be filmed from 
December 2005 through December 2006. 
The director issued a request for additional evidence, noting that most of the petitioner's awards were in 
an unrelated field, Tae Kwon Do. In response, counsel asserted that the petitioner was seeking 
classification as an alien of extraordinary ability "in the field of athletics," asserting that the petitioner 
has demonstrated his ability "in the field of Tae Kwon Do." On page five, counsel asserted that while 
the petitioner's awards were received more than 20 years before the petition was filed, "it is important 
to note that [the petitioner] is applying as a Tae Kwon Do instructor and demonstrator." Counsel 
continues, asserting that the petitioner's services as a Tae Kwon Do instructor are being sought by USA 
Tae Kwon Do and Choi's Korea-America Tae Kwon Do Academy. 
In the final decision, the director expressed confusion as to what type of employment the petitioner 
intended to pursue in the United States. On appeal, counsel asserts that the director ignored evidence 
of acclaim as an actor, Tae Kwon Do athlete and singer. 
A petitioner may not make material changes to a petition that has already been filed in an effort to 
make an apparently deficient petition conform to CIS requirements. See Matter of lzummi, 22 I&N 
Dec. 169, 1 75 (Comm. 1998). At the time of filing, the petitioner sought eligibility as an alien of 
extraordinary ability in the arts. It was in this field that he was most recently working and was 
intending to work. While the petitioner clearly uses his martial arts abilities in his film work, he is 
primarily now an actor; his abilities in the martial arts, while important, do not necessarily translate 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 4 
to acclaim as an actor. We will not consider a new claim that the petitioner is actually an alien of 
extraordinary ability in athletics, a field in which the petitioner had not competed for many years. 
Even if we were to consider counsel's new assertion that the petitioner will work as a martial arts 
instructor, the petitioner's past achievements as an athlete are not evidence of his extraordinary 
ability as an instructor. Counsel has relied on a non-precedent decision by this office for the 
proposition that achievements as an athlete can be considered for aliens who seek to coach or work 
as instructors. While a martial arts competitor and an instructor certainly share knowledge of martial 
arts, the two rely on very different sets of basic skills. Thus, competitive athletics and coaching are 
not the same area of expertise. This interpretation has been upheld in Federal Court. In Lee v. I.N.S., 
237 F. Supp. 2d 914 (N.D. Ill. 2002), the court stated: 
It is reasonable to interpret continuing to work in one's "area of extraordinary ability" 
as working in the same profession in which one has extraordinary ability, not 
necessarily in any profession in that field. For example, Lee's extraordinary ability as 
a baseball player does not imply that he also has extraordinary ability in all positions 
or professions in the baseball industry such as a manager, umpire or coach. 
Id. at 91 8. The court noted a consistent history in this area. While we will, on a case-by-case basis, 
sometimes consider the recent athletic achievements of an instructor that is instructing at the national 
level, the petitioner in this matter stopped competing 20 years before filing the petition. Thus, the 
petitioner would need to demonstrate that his achievements as an instructor serve to meet the 
regulatory criteria discussed below. 
In light of the above, we will adjudicate the appeal on the basis of the petitioner's accomplishments in 
the arts. 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). Baning the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at 
least three of wluch 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 that, he claims, meets the 
following criteria. ' 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
On his resume, the petitioner lists a 1 998 Rookie Actor award and a I 992 Award for People' s Choice at 
the Great Performance Award event sponsored by the Korea Broadcasting System. The record does not 
contain either award. Rather, in response to the director's request for additional evidence, the petitioner 
submitted a letter fkom the Korea Movie People Association asserting that the petitioner won the 
Daejong Award and New Actor Award in 1 998. Also, the petitioner initially submitted a November 5, 
1 
The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this 
decision. 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 5 
2004 letter for distinguished service issued by the Director of the Pusan International Film Festival "for 
his great service and dedication to the Pusan Film Festival and its committee." 
We concur with the director that the record contains no evidence regarding the significance of these 
awards. The certificate from the Pusan Film Festival appears to be a certificate of appreciation rather 
than an award for excellence in the field of acting. The petitioner submits no new evidence regarding 
the significance of these awards on appeal. As discussed above, the petitioner's martial arts awards are 
more than 20 years old and are not awards for excellence in the petitioner's field, acting. Thus, the 
petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien S membership in associations in the field for which classz>cation is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
The record contains no evidence of memberships in artistic associations, the field in whch 
classification was initially sought. Moreover, counsel relies on the petitioner's positions with martial 
arts associations rather than his membership in those associations as evidence to meet this criterion. 
Such evidence, were it related to the petitioner's field of acting and directing, would be better 
considered under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
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 classiJication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author ofthe material, and any necessary translation. 
The director asserted that the "published articles submitted in relation to the field in general [do] not 
directly mention the self-petitioner or his work as extraordinary ability with sustained acclaim." More 
analysis is required. The petitioner submitted articles that are primarily about him. The petitioner, 
however, did not submit evidence of the circulation of the publications that carried these articles. 
Without this evidence, we cannot determine whether those publications constitute major media. 
Consequently, 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 speczj2cution for which classzfication is sought. 
The record contains no specific evidence that the petitioner has judged the work of other actors or 
directors. Counsel noted that the petitioner was appointed as a technical Tae Kwon Do instructor. The 
evidence submitted to meet a given criterion must be indicative of or consistent with national or 
international acclaim. It is inherent to the occupation of instructor to evaluate one's students. Thus, 
even if we were to consider the petitioner's past success in Tae Kwon Do, the mere fact that he worked 
as an instructor is insufficient to meet this criterion. 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 6 
Evidence of the alien 's original scientzfic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted several vague letters of recommendation fiom members of the motion picture 
industry. 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. 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 Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Cornm. 
1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Cornm. 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. 
While the petitioner has had a long career in television and movies, the record lacks evidence as to 
how he has changed or impacted the industry. 
Counsel has asserted that the petitioner's roles in movies and television have contributed to the 
growth of Tae Kwon Do nationally in Korea and internationally. Without documentary evidence to 
support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The 
unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 
533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 
17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). The record contains no statistics demonstrating an increase in 
Tae Kwon Do participation correlating with the petitioner's movies and television appearances. The 
petitioner has also failed to demonstrate that his films are unique within the martial arts film genre 
such that we could attribute any increase in martial arts participation to him rather than the popularity 
of the genre in general. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien 's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner has appeared in movies and on television. It is inherent to the occupation of performing 
artist, however, to perform. We find that this criterion relates to the visual arts. The petitioner has not 
established that his movies or television shows constitute the type of exclusive showcase of his art that 
would be required to meet this criterion. 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 7 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
As stated above, the petitioner submitted evidence of his positions with various Tae Kwon Do entities. 
These positions, however, were not with entities in the petitioner's current field. 
Counsel asserted that the petitioner has starred in 15 motion pictures and seven television shows. The 
petitioner submitted his self-serving resume, Internet materials from the International Movie Database 
confirming his role acting in 12 movies, several movie posters (without translation) that appear to 
feature the petitioner prominently and a letter from the President of Korea Broadcasting confirming the 
petitioner's performances in seven programs but failing to specify his role in these shows. Most 
notably, the petitioner recently starred in the movie "Clementine" featuring an appearance by Steven 
Seagal (eight minutes according to an Internet review). While counsel implied that the petitioner also 
directed this movie, the newspaper articles indicate that someone else directed the movie although the 
petitioner did serve as producer. 
The record lacks evidence that any of the petitioner's movies or television shows have enjoyed a 
distinguished reputation. We will not presume the distinguished reputation of a movie simply because 
it features an eight-minute appearance fi-om an internationally known personality. Thus, the petitioner 
has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for 
services, in relation to others in the field. 
It is alleged that the petitioner would earn $60,000 for the movie "Black Roster" and that Jackie Chan 
only earned $30,000 for his first Hollywood movie. The petitioner has not submitted the contract 
confirming this remuneration or evidence that this wage compares with the remuneration of those at the 
top of the field. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofice receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
While "Clementine" received favorable reviews, the petitioner did not submit the required evidence for 
this criterion, box office receipts for the movie or evidence of the video/DVD sales. The petitioner also 
failed to submit evidence of the sales of his compact discs which he recorded as a singer. 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. 
WAC 05 233 52392 
Page 8 
Review of the record, however, does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself as an 
actorldirector 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 shows talent as an actor and Tae Kwon Do athlete but is not persuasive that the petitioner's 
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. 5 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal 
will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.