dismissed EB-1A Case: Athletics

.
U.S~ Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF E-W-H-
I' 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAR. I, 2019 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a member of the Board of Directors for , seeks to 
classify the Beneficiary as an individual of extraordinary ability in athletics. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § l 153(b)(l)(A). This first preference 
classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their extraordinary 
ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been 
recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Beneficiary had satisfied only two of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, 
of which he must meet at least three. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief arguing that the Beneficiary satisfies at least three of the ten 
criteria. 
· Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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 l)nited States to continue· work m the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
. (iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
.
Matter of E-W-H-. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those indivi9uals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R:§ 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth two options for satisfying this classification's initial evidence 
requirements. First, a petitioner can demonstrate that a beneficiary has a one-time achievement (that 
is a major, internationally recognized award). Alternatively, a petitioner must provide 
documentation for an individual that meets at least three of the ten categories of evidence listed at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) (including items such as awards, memberships, and published material 
in certain media). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) allows a petitioner to submit comparable 
material if it is able to demonstrate that the standards at 8 CYR. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) do not readily 
apply to a beneficiary's occupation. 
Where a beneficiary meets' these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) 
(discussing a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination); see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers,'4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). This two-step analysis is consistent with our holding that the "truth is to be 
determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality," as well as the principle that we 
examine "each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually 
and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is 
probably true." Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 ,(AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Beneficiary is professional table tennis player and trainer at the 
. Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that the Beneficiary has received a 
major, internationally recognized award; he must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). In denying the petition, the Director found that the 
Beneficiary met only two of the initial evidentiary criteria, membership · under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(ii) and critical role under 8 C.F.R. § 204:5(h)(3)(viii). On appeal, the Petitioner 
maintains that the Beneficiary meets three additional criteria, discussed below. We have reviewed 
all of the ,evidence in the record and conclude that it does not support a finding that the Beneficiary 
satisfies the requirements of at least three criteria. 
Documentation of the alien ·s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the .field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204 .5(h)(3)(i). 
As evidence under this criterion, the Petitioner submitted a certificate stating that the Beneficiary 
placed second in the " - Table Tennis" competition at the 
m 2011 and a photograph of him receiving his award. 
2 
.
Matter of E-W-H-
In addition, the Petitioner presented letters from head coach of the 
and president of and 
noting that the Beneficiary was 12 years old at the time he won second place at the aforementioned 
competition.' 
The record also included registration information for the event ( entitled 
indicating that this competition was held in 
2011. In response to the Director ' s request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner provided an article 
from Kompas.com , entitled is Held in Bali," that also 
shows that the aforementioned tournament took place from " 2011." While the 
Beneficiary's certificate from this tournament states that he won second place on ' 
2011," the registration information and article from Kompas.com demonstrate that the competition 
was not held until 2011. A petitioner must resolve discrepancies in the record with 
independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 
591-92 (BIA 1988). Unresolved material inconsistencies niay lead us to reevaluate the reliability 
and sufficiency of other evidence submitted in support of the requested immigration benefit. Id. 
Regardless, the information and evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate that the Ben_eficiary's . 
second place in the category is a nationally: or internationally recognized prize or award 
for excellence in the field. r 
The Petitioner also submitted certificates from table tennis competitions indicating that 
(201 7), (2016), 
qualifier (2012) .2 . In response to the Director's RFE, the 
the Beneficiary was an 
and 
Petitioner presented a letter from 
that both "the 2011 
, a member of Board of Directors , asserting 
and .the annual 
Tournaments are international competitions. These tournaments are sanctioned by the International 
Table Tennis Federation (ITTF) and players come from all over the world." In addition, the 
Petitioner offered a letter from Chief Executive Officer of stating that "the 
annual in Table Tennis co-sponsored by the is an international tournament 
sanctioned by the ITTF" and that this competition "is open to all nations." While the 
aforementioned tournaments were international competitions that included participants from 
multiple nations, the record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the 
Beneficiary ' s certificates or standings constitute "nationally or internationally recognized " prizes or 
1 In the appeal brief, the Petitioner contends_ that and statements confirm that the 
is an international competition. · While their letters mention the name of this 
tournament and the Beneficiary's age when the competition took place, they do not offer further details regarding his 
specific award or its level of recognition in the field. 
2 The Petitioner's documentation for this criterion also included certificates the Beneficiary received in various table 
tennis competitions (such as the ___ -~- . and 
. but the record does not contain sufficient evidence showing that his certificates or standings at these 
competitions are nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards in the field. 
3 
.
. Matter of E-W-H-
awards for excellence in the field.3 The Petitioner has not established therefore that the Beneficiary 
meets this regulatory criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
class(fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
The Director found that that the Petitioner had demonstrated the Beneficiary's eligibility under this 
. criterion. For the reasons outlined below, we find that the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient 
documentary evidence showing that the Beneficiary meets the requirements of this criterion. 
Accordingly, the Director's determination on this issue will be withdr31wn. 
In order to meet this criterion, the Petitioner must show that membership in the association is based 
on being judged by recognized national or international experts as having outstanding achievements 
in the field for which classification is sought.4 
As evidence for this criterion, the Petitioner submitted the Beneficiary's "ITTF Level l Coaching 
Certificate," information about the ITTF from Wikipedia, and a flowchart depicting the ITTF Level 1 
"Coaching Course Pathway," but he has not shown that successful completion of this ITTF training 
program constitutes his "membership" in an association.· Regardless, this evidence does not 
demonstrate that earning the ITTF Level 1 Coaching Certificate required outstanding achievements, 
as judged by recognized national or international experts. 
In addition, the Petitioner presented a credential from the 
People's Republic of China awarding the Beneficiary "First Class Athlete" 
membership. In addition, he provided a document entitled '_'Memberships - Technical grade 
standards for table tennis players," but the source of this document was not identified. In response to 
the Director's RFE, the Petitioner offered information from the Chinese Table Tennis Association 
(CTTA) website entitled "Technical Grade Standards for Table Tennis Players." In addition, the 
Petitioner's response included a June 2018 letter from , a worker at the "Hong Jiang City 
Athletic Bureau" (HJ CAB), stating that he "participate[s] in the selection and approval of First Class 
. Athlete Memberships" and listing that classification's approval criteria. The record, however, 
indicates that the Beneficiary's "First Class Athlete" membership was awarded by the and 
not the CTTA or the HJCAB. Because the , CTTA, arid HJCAB are different organizations, 
the Petitioner has not established that the CTTA's "Technical Grade Standards for Table Tennis 
· 3 The issue here is not the national or international scope of the Beneficiary's competitions, but rather ~hether his 
specific awards are "nationally or internationally recognized" prizes or awards for excellence in the field. 
4 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form /-140 
Petitions; Revisions to the Adjudicator 's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADI /-/4 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/poli~ymanual/HTML/PollcyManual.html. 
4 
.
Matter of E-W-H-. 
Players" or the HJCAB's approval criteria are applicable to his 
membership. 
"First Class Athlete" 
Even if the Petitioner had demonstrated that the CTTA or fUCAB's requirements applied to the 
Beneficiary's "First . Class Athlete" membership, the record does not establish that this 
membership classification requires outstanding achievements, as judged by recognized national or 
international experts. The information from CTTA's website lists the requirements for receiving the 
honorary titles of "First Class Athlete" (the Beneficiary's designation), "National Level Athlete;" 
and "World-Class Athlete." For example, the first requirement listed for "First Class Athlete" calls 
for achieving "top 16 at team event or top 32 at an individual event" in a national contest. In 
addition, the third requirement calls for achieving "top 8 at team event or top 16 at a single' s event" 
in the "National Youth Games." We note that the CTTA's "World-Class Athlete" and "National 
Level Athlete" membership classifications require significantly higher levels of achievement than 
"First Class Athlete" membership. 5 The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the "First Class 
Athlete" membership classification requi~ements rise to the level of outstanding achievements. 
Finally, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that "First Class Athlete" 
candidates' achievements are judged by recognized national o'r international experts. For these 
reasons, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media. relating to the alien's work in the field.for which classffication is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date. and author of the material. and any necessary 
translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
As documentation for this criterion, the Petitioner submitted two articles that 
about the Beneficiary available at https://www. 
2015) and "[The Beneficiary]: 
addition, the Petitioner presented statements from and 
authored 
"[The Beneficiary]: 
2017). In 
(Media and Communications Director for asserting that the aforementioned website "is the 
official website for ," "is the most significant publication for ," and "attracts over 
35,000 unique readers each month." The assertions of these officials, however, are 
ins{ifficient to demonstrate that their organization's website qualifies as a form of major media. 
USCIS need not rely on the self-promotional material of the publisher. See Braga v. Poulos, No. CV 
06 5105 SJO, aff'd 317 Fed. Appx. 680 (C.A.9). The Petitioner has not presented corroborating 
evidence, nor has it provided comparative statistics or other evidence showing that the readership or 
number of online views for .https://www . __________ elevates it to major media 
5 For instance, according to the CTTA ;s "Technical Grade Standards for Table Tennis Players," "National Level 
Athlete" membership requires winning first place at a Junior Championship event or at a Chinese National Athletic 
Association competition. In addition, "World-Class Athlete' membershi p requires the highest level of achievement such 
as placing in the top three at the "Olympic Games, World Championships, World Cup events" or achieving a top 20 
player ranking from the ITTF. 
5 
.
Matter of E-W-H-
relative to other publications. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary 
satisfies this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific , scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sign(ficance in the.fie/cf.. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
As evidence under this criterion, the Petitioner provided various letters of support discussing the 
Beneficiary's playing skills and his work training other table tennis players .6 For example, 
a member since 2014, states that the Beneficiary "has been my training 
partner and coach since 2013 and he is the main reason I have done well in recent years. . . . 
Although [the Beneficiary] is not listed as my official coach, I know he is the one who has helped 
me the most in my progress." 7 In addition, Coach, asserts 
that the Beneficiary's "playing style, two winged looper, is rare among the national level U.S. 
players and therefore he is a much sought-after player for to build a team of diverse 
styles." further indicates: "[ not only want [the Beneficiary] to help train our team for . 
international competitions , I also have high hopes that he could represent the U.S. in international 
competitions one day." 
The Director considered the letters of support, but found that they were not sufficient to demonstrate 
that the Beneficiary has made original contributions of major significance in the field. In order to 
satisfy the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), a petitioner must establish that not only has the 
beneficiary made contributions that were . original but that they have been of major significance in · 
the field. The record, however, does not indicate that the- Beneficiary's methods of play have 
affected numerous others in his sport, that he introduced techniques that have been widely utilized, or 
that his work otherwise represents an original contribution of major significance in the field. 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary meets this criterion, but does not 
con~est the Director's findings for this criterion, point to specific evidence demonstrating his 
· eligibility, or offer _additional arguments. Without sufficient evidence showing the nature of his 
original contributions or their major significance in the field, the Petition'er has not established that 
the -B~neficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 c:F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
The Petitioner's documentation shows that the Beneficiary has performed in a critical role as a coach 
and trainer for and that this organization has a distinguished reputation. The record therefore 
supports the Director's determination that the Benefici~ry meets this criterion. 
6 We discuss only a sampling of these letters , but have reviewed and considered each one .· 
7 According to her webpage at https ://www . was the at the 2015 
. and played for at the ____ · in 2017. Her profile on this webpage 
identifies her coaches as and 
6 
Matter pf.E-W-H-
III. CONCLUSION 
The Beneficiary is not eligible because the Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence 
of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, 
we need not provide the type of final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-
20. Nevertheless, we advise that we have reviewed the _record in the aggregate, concluding that it 
does not support a finding that the Beneficiary has established the acclaim and recognition required 
for the classification sought. 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent 
and alternate basis for the decision. In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to 
establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 _U.S.C. § 1361; 
Matter o.fSkirball Cultural Ctr., 25 I&N Dec. 799, 8'06 (AAO 2012). Here, that burden has not been 
met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as µatter of E-W-H-, ID# 21.77180 (AAO Mar. 1, 2019) 
...,