dismissed EB-1A Case: Athletics

U.S. Department of Hameland Security 
20 Mass. Ave.. N.W.. Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: EAC 03 180 52608 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 8 2U05 
1N RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Aliet~ Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §- 1153(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 
cided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
I 
% Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 03 180 52608 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service 
Center, and is 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)(l )(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationatity Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. Ij 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in 
athletics. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international 
acclaim requisite to classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(I) 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 a~bility in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievemerits have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter thr: United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
The applicable regulation defines the statutory term "extraordinary ability" as "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. 9; 204.5(h)(2). Specific supporting evidr:nce must accompany the petition to document the "sustained 
national or international acclaim" that the statule requires. 8 C.F.R. 9; 204.5(h)(3). An alien can establish 
sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a "one-time achievement (that is, a major, 
international recognized award)." Id. Absent such an award, an alien can establish the necessary sustained 
acclaim by meeting at least three of ten other reg:ulatory criteria. Id. However, the weight given to evidence 
submitted to fulfill the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h) must depend on the extent to which such evidence 
demonstrates, reflects, or is consistent with sust.ained national or international acclaim at the very top of the 
alien's field of endeavor. A lower evidentiary standard would not be consistent with the regulatory definition 
of "extraordinary ability" as "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. Ij 204.5(h)(2). 
In this case, the petitioner seeks classification of the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary ability in athletics 
as a mountaineer and alpine instructor. The petitioner submitted supporting evidence including a letter from the 
International Mountaineers Association (IMA), a certificate from the Georgian Federation of Mountaineering, a 
certificate from the Mountaineering Associaticln of Tibet, evidence of the beneficiary's membership in 
mountaineering and alpine associations, media articles, and a copy of the beneficiary's 2002 federal income tax 
return. The director found the record did not establish that the beneficiary had achieved the requisite sustained 
EAC 03 180 52608 
Page 3 
acclaim. On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter and additional evidence including the beneficiary's resume, 
four support letters from mountaineering profi:ssionals, and a copy of the beneficiary's diploma. The 
petitioner's claims and the additional evidence mbmitted on appeal do not overcome the deficiencies of the 
petition and the appeal will be dismissed. We address the evidence submitted and the petitioner's contentions in 
the following discussion of the regulatory criteria relevant to the petitioner's case. 
(9 Documentation of the uIienl.s receipt of le~ser nutionully or internationully recognized prizes or awards 
for excellence in the field ($endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted a photocopy of an unidentified medal and a certificate from the Mountaineering 
Association of Tibet, Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China. The certificate affirms that "on 
26 May 1999 at 13:45, the Summit of Everest Georgian Team Leaderhas reached the altitude of 
8848. 1.3m (5 member) above sea level on an expedition to peak 8848 of Mount Everest. Members: 
" Even if this certitlcate is a nationally or internation* 
recognized prize or award for mot~ntainecring excellence. it was granted to the beneficiary in 1999, four years - 
before this petition was filed, and does not demonstrate sustained acclaim. 
A letter from President of the International Mountaineers Association, states that the beneficiary 
"has repeatedly gained the championship and prize places on different championships of the former USSR," but 
the record contains no evidence to corroborate this claim. In his letter submitted on appeal, the petitioner's 
president, explains that "[tlhe pictures of medals and Diplomas he received are only a few he was 
awarded with. In his resume, only a few, most significant ones, are represented: number of other prizes he got 
exceeds hundreds" (emphasis in original). The beneficiary's resume lists ten awards including "'Order of 
Honor' of the Republic of Georgia (highest award)" and "Olympic Gold Medal of Israel," but the petitioner 
submitted no documentary evidence of these awards. The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains 
entirely with the petitioner, Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. (i 1361. Simply going on record without 
supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient to meet the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of 
,SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Mutrer (?f Treu.sure Crufi of C'ulifornia. 14 i&N Dec. 190 
(Reg. Comm. 1972)). Accordingly, the beneficiary does not meet this criterion. 
(ii) Documentcrlinn of the ulien ',r membership in ussociations in the fieldf~r which clussification is sought, 
which require outstunding uchirvements of their members, as judged by recognized nutional or international 
experts in their disciplines orJeld.~. 
The record indicates that the beneficiary is a metnber of the United Team of Georgian Climbers, the Georgian 
Mountaineers Federation, the Edelweiss alpine club, the International Mountaineers Association (IMA), and the 
American Alpine Club. The letter of 1MA president, submitted on appeal states that the 
beneficiary has been a member of the United 'Team of Georgian Climbers since 1986, but the record contains no 
corroborative documentation of the beneficiary's membershi in this team or evidence that outstanding 
achievements are prerequisite to team membership. letter submitted with the petition states that 
the beneficiary "has been the member and one of the founders of the Georgian Mountaineers Federation since 
1990." The record indicates that the beneficiary climbed Mount Everest i; 1999 and a peak named "America 
500" in the Caucasian mountains in 1992 as part of this federation, but the petitioner submitted no evidence of 
the federation's membership criteria or other evidence that outstanding achievements are prerequisite to 
membership in the federation. In both of his letters, states that the beneficiary has been an 
instructor for the Edelweiss alpine club for more than 15 years. In addition, the petitioner submitted a copy of 
EAC 03 180 52608 
Page 4 
an article from an unidentified source dated Febrr~ary 12, 1998 and entitled "We Will Conquer Everest." This 
article states that the Edelweiss club is "presided by the honoured sportsman, master of sport Merab 
Nemsitsveridze." But again, the record contains no evidence that outstanding achievements are prerequisite to 
Edelweiss club membership. 
A printout from the IMA website contains a photograph of the beneficiary in a list of "Founders and Members 
of IMA," but the association's charter states that "[alny citizen can become a member of the Association who 
recognizes the goals of the Association and its Charter." The printout does not indicate that outstanding 
achievements are prerequisite to IMA membership. 
The petitioner submitted a letter dated Decemb1:r 13, 2002 welcoming the beneficiary as a member of the 
American Alpine Club (AAC). The letter states, "The American Alpine Club offers opportunities to work and 
play with a diverse and talented group of members. As a member, you join the country's best climbers." On 
appeal, the petitioner submits a letter from President of the AAC. affirms that "[ill is 
with great pleasure that we welcomed [the beneficiary] in our club: it's a great honor to have one of the best 
mountaineers of the world participating in the club's work." However, the record contains no documentation of 
the AAC membership criteria or other evidence that outstanding achievements are prerequisite to AAC 
membership. Accordingly, the beneficiary does not meet this criterion. 
(iii) Published muterial about the alien in prtdissionul or mqjor trade publications or other major media, 
relaring to the alien's work in thejeld.for which cla.s.s$cation is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author ofthe material, und any necessuty trunslution. 
The record contains an article entitled "The Firsl: Georgian Expedition to Everest" written by '- 
Head of the expedition" and published in the Winter-Summer, 199912000 edition of Georgia Traveller, a 
b'Nonpolitical magazine about Georgia." The article contains a photograph of the expedition members, 
including the beneficiary, but only mentions the beneficiary in passing in the text of the article. A second article 
from an unidentified source dated February 12, 1998 and entitled "We Will Conquer Everest" features a 
photograph of the beneficiary and discusses his a~:con~plishments. The petitioner also submitted printouts from 
two websites that mention the beneficiary in connection with his Mount Everest expedition. The first printout is 
from Everes! NPWS and includes the beneficiary in a list of climbers who have reached the summit. The second 
printout is from Ri.d Online and contains a photograph of the beneficiary and identifies him as one of the 
expedition members. The record is devoid of any evidence that these materials were published in professional, 
major trade publications or other major media. Consequently, they do not evidence the beneficiary's eligibility 
under this criterion. 
The record also contains a photocopy of a videotape labeled "SNN Everest 99 Manaslli 98 America 92." The 
photocopy contains a handwritten caption, "It was broadcasted by CNN in 1999 (July)." Yet the petitioner did 
not submit this videotape or any other primary evidence that the Cable News Network or any other tnajor media 
source reported his climbs. Again, simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient to meet the burden of proof in these proceedings. Id. Accordingly, the beneficiary does not meet this 
criterion. 
(iv) Evidence of the alien '.Y participution, eirhl.r individually or oit a panel, as a judge of the work of others 
in the sume or un ulliedfield of speclficulionji~r which cluss~~cution is sought. 
EAC 03 180 52608 
Page 5 
The record indicates that the beneficiary has beem a mountaineering instructor for the Edelweiss alpine club. 
While this work undoubtedly includes judging his students' abilities, it does not demonstrate the beneficiary's 
eligibility under this criterion. Duties or activitie!.; which nominally fall under a given regulatory criterion at 8 
C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3) do not demonstrate national or international acclaim if they are inherent or routine in the 
occupation itself, or in a substantial proportion of positions within that occupation. The petitioner submitted no 
evidence that the beneficiary has judged of the work of other individuals in his field in a manner significantly 
outside the general duties of his position as a mountaineering instructor and reflective of national or 
international acclaim. Accordingly, he does not meet this criterion. 
{v) Evidence of the alien's originul scienlific, scholurly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of 
mujor signiJicance in the field. 
The record contains seven support letters written by the petitioner and three mountaineering experts who have 
worked with the beneficiary. While such letters provide relevant information about an alien's experience and 
accomplishments, they cannot by themselves estalblish the alien's eligibility under this criterion because they do 
not demonstrate that the alien's work is of major significance in his field beyond the limited number of 
individuals with whom he has worked directly. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by 
an alien in support of an immigration petition cany less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of major 
contributions that one would expect of an alien who has sustained national or international acclaim. 
Accordingly, we review the letters as they relate to other evidence of the petitioner's contributions. 
On appeal, the petitioner states, "The Beneficiary has conquered more than 500 highest peaks in the world, 
including ALL highest peaks known on ALL continents (see his resume): only about 100 beople in the world 
conquered the same peaks, and only a few dozens reached that number of climbings; besides, he was a 
Pioneer on the highest peaks - to climb without oxygen." The beneficiary's resume states that he is a 
"[c]onqueror of more than 500 highest peaks in the world, including the highest peaks on ALL continents . . . 
Participant and Team Leader of hundreds of mountain expeditions; Pioneer of climbing without oxygen." The 
letter of IMA President, submitted with the petition, states that the beneficiary "has done more 
than 120 difficult claims [sic]. . . . In 1992 he climbed the peak of Shisha-Pangma (8046 m.) In 1999 he 
climbed the peak of Everest (8848 m.) He has done more than 50 the most difficult climbs. He has climbed all 
the 7000 m. peaks of the former USSR." In his ]letter submitted on appeal, states the beneficiary 
"has done about 500 hundreds [sic] climbs to the highest peaks on the Earth." President of Asian 
Trekking (P), Limited, affirms that the beneficiary "participated in many team climbs to the most highest [sic] 
peaks in Himalayas, Tibet, Pamir and Tian-Shan; beside those, he conquered all the highest peaks on all 
continents. Also, he was an instructor and leader in many climbs: his brilliant mountaineering technique and 
very rich experience contributed greatly to the success of many our expeditions [sic]." AAC 
President, writes that the beneficiary, "undoubtedly, is one of the top masters in mountaineering: his conquering 
all the highest peaks in the world proved him to be one of the best in the field." also notes that the 
beneficiary has a "rich experience [as] an alpine master and instructor and brilliant technique." Neither 
nor speci@ or explain the beneficiary's "brilliant technique" and the record does not 
otherwise establish that his technique has made a ,major contribution to his sport. 
The record contains corroborative evidence of on.ly two of the beneficiary's expeditions. Evidence regarding his 
1999 expedition on Mount Everest was discussed above under the first and third criteria. The petitioner also 
submitted a Certificate attesting to the naming ofUAmerica 500,'' a previously unnamed peak in the Caucasian 
mountains, in 1992. The beneficiary is named on the certificate as the "Leader of the expedition." A third letter 
EAC 03 180 52608 
Page 6 
from written in his position as President of the Georgian Mountaineering Federation and submitted 
on appeal affirms that the beneficiary climbed this mountain. Yet the record contains no other primary evidence 
to document the beneficiary's alleged climbing of all the highest peaks known on all contitlents. While the 
beneficiary's resume and the support letters maly attest to these accomplishments, simply going on record 
without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient to meet the burden of proof in these proceedings. M. 
The record thus shows that the petitioner has climbed "America 500" and Mount Everest, but the evidence 
submitted does not establish that these accompli!ihments made original contributions of major significance to 
mountaineering in a manner consistent with the requisite sustained acclaim. The record also fails to document 
the beneficiary's other alleged climbs and contributions to his sport. Accordingly, the beneficiary does not meet 
this criterion. 
(viij Evidence of the displuy of the alien's worh in the field mt urcislic exhibitions or showcuseLs. 
In his first letter submitted with the petition, claimed that "[tlhere were artistic exhibitions of [the 
beneficiary's] climbing peaks, on radio and TV: one of the cassettes (Exhibit VI) was broadcast by CNN in 
1999." Although this criterion applies to visual artists, we could consider such materials as comparable 
evidence of the beneficiary's eligibility pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(4). However, the petitioner did not 
submit a copy of the CNN broadcast or evidence: of any other radio or television coverage of his expeditions. 
Accordingly, the beneficiary does not meet this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien bus perJbrmed in a lradrng or critical role for organizations or establishments 
that have u distinguished reputation. 
The record indicates that the beneficiary is a fourding member of the Georgian Mountaineers Federation and a 
leading instructor for the Edelweiss alpine club. However, the petitioner submitted no evidence that these two 
organizations have distinguished reputations or that the beneficiary has performed in a leading or critical role for 
either organization in a manner reflective of sustained national or international acclaim. Accordingly, the 
beneficiary does not meet this criterion. 
fi-u) Evidence that the aIicn has communded u high sulary or other signrficantly high remunerution  for 
services, in rekutlcm to others in ~hefirld 
The submitted copy of the beneficiary's federal income tax return shows that he had an adjusted gross income of 
$900 in 2002. On the Form 1-2906 counsel states "CIS didn't take into account that Beneficiary could reach 
higher salary and commercial success ONLY participating and preparing for climbing expeditions (he can't do it 
w, at his P-1 status.)" (emphasis in original). in his letter submitted on appeal,explains that "due to 
[the beneficiary's] uncertain status (and long immigration procedure of its extension), he couldn't be employed 
on a stable contract; that's why he could show only one W-2 (occasional earning); no doubt, if he had had 
permanent employment authorization, he could have been employed and paid, as he deserved by his class) 
[sic]." The record indicates that the beneficiary entered the United States on August 28, 2001 in P-1 
nonimmigrant status, less than two years before his petition was tiled. Although the beneficiary may not have 
been able to command a high salary in his tield iln the United States, the petitioner submitted no evidence that 
the beneficiary ever received remuneration significantly higher than other mountaineers or alpine instructors, or 
comparable to such individuals at the very top of their field, in Georgia. Accordingly, the beneficiary does not 
meet this criterion. 
EAC 03 1 80 52608 
Page 7 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien uncler section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ I I53(b)(I)(A), 
only if the alien can establish extraordinary ability through extensive documentation of sustained national or 
international acclaim demonstrating that the alien has risen to the very top of his or her field. The evidence in 
this case indicates that the beneficiary is a mountaineer and alpine instructor who has climbed Mount Everest 
and "America 500." However, the record does not establish that the beneficiary has achieved sustained national 
or international acclaim placing him at the very top of his field. He is thus ineligible for classification as an 
alien with extraordinary ability pursuant to secticln 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. €j 1 153(b)(l)(A), and his 
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 net sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be 
dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.