dismissed EB-1A Case: Athletics

identifyingdatadeletedto
preventclearlyunwarranted
invasionof personalprivacy
puCCOPi
U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity
U.S.CitizenshipandImmigrationServices
Officeof AdministrativeAppealsMS 2090
Washington,DC 20529-2090
8 U.S.Citizenship
andImmigration
Services
FILE: Office:NEBRASKASERVICECENTER Date:OCT 0 4 2010
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionfor Alien WorkerasanAlien of ExtraordinaryAbility Pursuantto Section
203(b)(1)(A)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 11S3(b)(1)(A)
ON BEHALFOFPETITIONER:
INSTRUCT[ONS:
Enclosedpleasefmd the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents
relatedto thismatterhavebeenreturnedtotheofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcase.Pleasebeadvisedthat
anyfurtherinquirythatyou might haveconcerningyour casemustbemadeto thatoffice.
If you believethe law wasinappropriatelyappliedby us in reachingour decision,or you haveadditional
informationthatyou wishto haveconsidered,you mayfile a motionto reconsideror a motionto reopen.The
specificrequirementsfor filing sucha requestcanbe foundat 8 C.F.R.§ 103.5. All motionsmustbe
submittedto theofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcasebyfiling a FormI-290B,Noticeof Appealor Motion,
with a feeof $585. Pleasebe awarethat8 C.F.R.§ 103.5(a)(1)(i)requiresthatanymotionmustbefiled
within 30 daysof the decisionthat the motion seeksto reconsideror reopen.
Thankyou,
Yl
Perry iew
Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice
www.uscus.gov
Page2
DISCUSSION: The employment-basedimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director,
NebraskaServiceCenter,andisnowbeforetheAdministrativeAppealsOffice(AAO) onappeal.The
appealwill bedismissed.
Thepetitionerseeksclassificationasan"alienof extraordinaryability" in athletics,pursuantto section
203(b)(1)(A)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct(theAct),8U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(1)(A))Thedirector
determinedthat the petitionerhad not establishedthe requisiteextraordinaryability throughextensive
documentationandsustainednationalor internationalacclaim.
Congressseta very high benchmarkfor aliensof extraordinaryability by requiringthroughthe statute
that the petitionerdemonstratethe alien's"sustainednationalor intemationalacclaim"andpresent
"extensivedocumentation"of the alien's achievements.Seesection203(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act and
8C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3).Theimplementingregulationat 8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3)statesthatanaliencan
establishsustainednationalor internationalacclaimthroughevidenceof a one-timeachievementof a
major,internationallyrecognizedaward. Absentthereceiptof suchanaward,theregulationoutlines
tencategoriesof specificobjectiveevidence.8 C.F.R.§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)through(x). Thepetitionermust
submitqualifying evidenceunderat leastthreeof the ten regulatorycategoriesof evidenceto establish
thebasiceligibility requirements.
On appeal.counselarguesthat the petitionermeetsat leastthreeof the ten regulatorycategoriesof
evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). For the reasonsdiscussedbelow, we uphold the director's
decision.
I. Law
Section203(b)of theAct states,in pertinentpart,that:
(1) Priority workers.- Visas shall first be madeavailable. . . to qualifiedimmigrantswho are
aliensdescribedin anyof thefollowing subparagraphs(A) through(C):
(A) Alienswith extraordinaryability.-- An alienisdescribedin thissubparagraphif --
(i) the alien has extraordinaryability in the sciences,arts, education,
business,or athleticswhichhasbeendemonstratedby sustainednationalor
internationalacclaimandwhoseachievementshavebeenrecognizedin the
fieldthroughextensivedocumentation,
(ii) thealienseeksto entertheUnitedStatesto continueworkin theareaof
extraordinaryability,and
' Accordingto informationontheFormI-140petition,thepetitionerwaslastadmittedto theUnitedStatesin 2007asa
B-1nonimmigrantvisitor.
Page3
(iii) the alien's entry into the United Stateswill substantiallybenefit
prospectivelytheUnitedStates.
U.S.CitizenshipandImmigrationServices(USCIS)andlegacyImmigrationandNaturalizationService
(lNS) haveconsistentlyrecognizedthatCongressintendedto seta very high standardfor individuals
seekingimmigrantvisasasaliensof extraordinaryability. SeeH.R. 723 101" Cong.,2d Sess.59
(1990);56Fed.Reg.60897,60898-99(Nov.29,1991).Theterm"extraordinaryability" refersonly
to thoseindividualsin thatsmallpercentagewho haverisento theverytop of thefield of endeavor.
Id. and8C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2).
Theregulationat 8 C.F.R.§ 204.5(h)(3)requiresthatanaliendemonstratehis or hersustainedacclaim
andthe recognitionof his or her achievementsin the field. Suchacclaimandachievementsmustbe
establishedeitherthroughevidenceof aone-timeachievement(thatis, amajor,internationalrecognized
award)or throughmeetingat leastthreeof thefollowing tencategoriesof evidence.
(i) Documentationof thealien's receiptof lessernationallyor internationallyrecognized
prizesor awardsfor excellencein thefieldof cndeavor;
(ii) Documentationof the alien's membershipin associationsin the field for which
classificationis sought,which require outstandingachievementsof their members,as
judgedbyrecognizednationalor internationalexpertsin theirdisciplinesor fields;
(iii) Publishedmaterialaboutthe alien in professionalor major tradepublicationsor
othermajormedia,relatingto the alien'swork in the field for which classificationis
sought. Suchevidenceshallincludethetitle, date,andauthorof thematerial,andany
necessarytranslation;
(iv) Evidenceof thealien'sparticipation,eitherindividuallyor onapanel,asajudgeof
thework of othersin thesameor anallied field of specializationfor which classification
is sought;
(v) Evidenceof the alien'soriginalscientific,scholarly,artistic,athletic,or business-
relatedcontributionsof majorsignificancein thefield;
(vi) Evidenceof thealien'sauthorshipof scholarlyarticlesin thefield,in professionalor
majortradepublicationsor othermajormedia;
(vii) Evidenceof the displayof the alien'swork in the field at artisticexhibitionsor
showcases;
(viii) Evidencethatthealienhasperformedin aleadingor criticalrolefor organizations
or establishmentsthathaveadistinguishedreputation;
(ix) Evidencethatthealienhascommandeda highsalaryor othersignificantlyhigh
remunerationfor services,in relationto othersin thefield; or
Page4
(x) Evidenceof commercialsuccessesin theperformingarts,asshownby box office
receiptsorrecord,cassette,compactdisk,or videosales.
In 2010,theU.S.Courtof Appealsfor theNinthCircuit(NinthCircuit)reviewedthedenialof apetition
filed underthisclassification,SeeKazarianv. USCIS,596F.3d1115(9* Cir. 2010). Althoughthe
courtupheldtheAAO's decisionto denythepetition,thecourttookissuewiththeAAO's evaluationof
evidencesubmittedto meeta given evidentiarycriterion.2 With respectto the criteriaat 8 C.F.R.
§204.5(h)(3)(iv)and(vi), thecourtconcludedthatwhile USCISmayhaveraisedlegitimateconcerns
aboutthesignificanceof theevidencesubmittedto meetthosetwo criteria,thoseconcernsshouldhave
beenraisedin a subsequent"final meritsdetermination."Id.
The court statedthat the AAO's evaluationrestedon an improper understandingof the regulations.
Insteadof parsingthe significanceof evidenceaspart of the initial inquiry, the court statedthat "the
properprocedureisto countthetypesof evidenceprovided(whichtheAAO did)," andif thepetitioner
failed to submitsufficientevidence,"the properconclusionis thatthe applicanthasfailedto satisfythe
regulatory requirementof three types of evidence(as the AAO concluded)."Id. at 1122(citing to
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)). The court also explainedthe "final merits determination"asthe corollary to
this procedure:
If a petitionerhassubmittedthe requisiteevidence,USCISdetermineswhetherthe
evidencedemonstratesbotha "level of expertiseindicatingthattheindividualis oneof
that small percentagewho have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of endeavor,"
8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2),and"thatthealienhassustainednationalor internationalacclaim
and that his or her achievementshave been recognizedin the field of expertise."
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).Only alienswhoseachievementshave garnered"sustained
national or international acclaim" are eligible for an "extraordinary ability" visa.
8U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(1)(A)(i).
Id. at 1119-1120.
Thus,Kazarian setsforth a two-partapproachwherethe evidenceis first countedandthenconsidered
in the contextof a final merits determination.In reviewing ServiceCenterdecisions,the AAO will
apply the test setforth in Kazarian. As the AAO maintainsde novoreview,the AAO will conducta
newanalysisif thedirectorreachedhisor herconclusionby usinga one-stepanalysisratherthanthe
two-stepanalysisdictatedby the Kazarian court. SeeSpencerEnterprises,Inc. v. UnitedStates,229
F. Supp.2d 1025,1043(E.D.Cal.2001),affd, 345F.3d683(9' Cir. 2003);seealsoSoltanev.
DOJ,381F.3d143,145(3dCir. 2004)(notingthattheAAO conductsappellatereviewonadenovo
basis).
H. Analysis
2 Specifically,the court statedthat the AAO hadunilaterallyimposednovelsubstantiveor evidentiaryrequirements
beyondthosesetforth in theregulationsat8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3)(iv)and8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Page5
A. EvidentiaryCriteria
This petition,filed on June27, 2007,seeksto classifythe petitionerasan alienwith extraordinary
ability asakaratecompetitorandinstructor. Thepetitionerhassubmittedevidencepertainingto the
followingcategoriesof evidenceat8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3)
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally
recognizedprizes or awardsfor excellencein thefield of endeavor.
The petitionersubmittedevidenceof his receiptof first placein the Kumiteandsecondplacein the
Kata eventsat the 3 4Asian FriendshipKarateCup in 2006. Thepetitioneralsosubmitteda "Kumite
CompetitorCertificate"statingthatheparticipatedin the2005FunakoshiShotokanKarateAssociation
(FSKA) AnnualWorld KarateChampionshipsanda photographof a smalltrophyfrom the event
bearing the inscription "Fighting Spirit Award." The petitioner also submittedexcerptsfrom the
"FunakoshiShotokanKarateAssociationVIII World Championships19thAnnualProgramBooklet and
Yearbook" (October2006)which includeda photographfrom the precedingyear'seventshowingthe
petitionerfinished"4th place"in the Men's Black Belt Kumite (SuperMiddle Weight) division. The
petitioner'sevidencealsoincludedanAward of Excellencecertificatestatingthathe"participatedin the
2007 U.S.A. ShotokanKarateFederationInternationalMastersTrainingCampand Kata Bunkai
Seminar" a Certificateof Merit for hisparticipationin the2008InternationalMartialArts Association
(IMAA) Conference,a certificatestatingthathe"honorablyparticipatedin theInternationalUnionof
KaratedoOrganizations2008trainingcampandjunior championship"(March2008),anda March 1,
2008 Certificateof Appreciationfor his "participationin the programorganizedby the United Sherpa
Association"in New York. There is no evidenceshowingthat thesefour certificatesequateto
nationallyor internationallyrecognizedprizesor awardsfor excellencein karate,ratherthansimply
acknowledgingthe petitioner'sparticipationin the precedingevents. Moreover,we note that the
petitionerreceivedthelatterthreeparticipationcertificatessubsequentto thepetition'sfiling date. A
petitioner,however,mustestablisheligibility at thetime of filing. 8 C.F.R.§§ 103.2(b)(1),(12);
Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Regl. Commr. 1971). Accordingly, the AAO will not
consider these 2008 participation certificates in this proceeding. The petitioner also submitted
Lettersof Appreciationfrom the "SherpaSocietyServiceSindhupalchok,Kathmandu"andNepal
ShotokanKarateAssociation(NSKA), andaphotocopyof a May 20,2006"BestPlayerof theYear
2005"awardplaquefromtheNepalKarateFederation(NKF) andtheNationalSportsCouncil. These
Letters of Appreciation and award plaque were presentedto the petitioner in honor of his
aforementioned"4th place"in the Men's Black Belt Kumite at the 2005VII FSKA World Karate
Championship.
The AAO notedfrom the submittedphotocopythatthe petitioner's"BestPlayerof the Year2005"
awardplaquemisspelled"Council" as"Counail."On May 5, 2010,the AAO requestedthe original
awardplaqueandinformation"identifying specificallyall awardrecipientswho receivedthe 'Best
Playerof the Year2005' designation."The petitionerrespondedby submittingthe original award
3Thepetitionerdoesnotclaimto meetorsubmitevidencerelatingtothecategoriesof evidencenotdiscussedin this
decision.
Page6
plaque,thephotographin the"FunakoshiShotokanKarateAssociationVIII WorldChampionships19*
AnnualProgramBookletandYearbook"showingthe petitionerfinished"4th place,"andcopiesof
publishedarticlessubmittedat thetime of filing. Thepetitioneralsosubmitteda July 6, 2010letter
from thePresidentof theNKF statingthatthepetitionerreceivedthe"BestPlayerof the Year2005"
awardplaquebasedonhis"winningrecordfromthe7thFSKAWorldKarateChampionship. . . where
[the petitioner]won the 4'hplacein kumiteeventsof men'sblack belt 2"dDan & 3'dDan degree
division and receivedthe [F]ighting Spirit Award." The petitioner'sresponse,however,did not
specificallyidentifyall the"BestPlayerof theYear2005"awardrecipientsasrequestedby theAAO.
The petitioner's failure to submit requestedevidencethat precludesa material line of inquiry
constitutesgroundsfor denyingthepetition. 8 C.F.R.§ 103.2(b)(14).
Although documentationof thepetitioner'sawardsappearsin therecord,evidencedemonstratingtheir
significanceand national or internationalrecognition is notably absent. The petitioner submitted
excerptsfrom the FSKA VII World Championships18* Annual ProgramBooklet and Yearbookand
the FSKA VIII World Championships19thAnnual ProgramBooklet and Yearbook,and general
information from the organizer'swebsite,but theseself serving materialsfrom the FSKA do not
establishthat the petitioner's 4th place and Fighting Spirit Award are nationally or internationally
recognizedawardsin the sportof karate. Thepetitioner'sawardsareaccompaniedby no information
about the divisions in which he competed,including how his competitionswere nationally or
internationallyrecognizedin thefield of karateor in thegeneralareaof martialarts. Thepetitionerdid
not submit evidence(suchas official results)showing the numberof participantsin the competitive
categoriesin which thepetitionerreceivedawards,the standingor recognitionof theotherparticipants
in his categories,or any other indication that winning his awardsconferrednationalor international
recognitionfor excellencein karateor themartialarts. Theplain languageof theregulatorycriterion
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) specifically requiresthat the petitioner's awardsbe nationally or
internationallyrecognizedin thefield of endeavorandit is his burdento establisheveryelementof
this criterion. In this case,thereis no evidenceestablishingthat the petitioner'sawardshad a
significant level of recognition beyond the context of the events where they were presented.
Moreover, a competition may be opento athletesfrom throughouta particularcountry or countries,
but this factor alone is not adequateto establish that an award or prize is "nationally or
internationallyrecognized." The burdenis on the petitioner to demonstratethe level of recognition
and achievementassociatedwith his awards. Furthermore,with regardto awardswon by the
petitionerin obscurekaratecompetitionsnotdemonstratedto havea significantpool of competitors,
we cannot conclude that such awards demonstratequalifying forms of national or international
recogmtion.
Thepetitionersubmittedadditionalcertificatesfor his successfulcompletionof trainingcoursesand
attainment of various belt rankings, but these certificates do not equate to nationally or
internationallyrecognizedprizesor awardsfor excellencein the field. Thefirst, second,andthird
degreeblack belt certificatesreflect that the petitionerearneda promotionin rank basedon his
successfulcompletionof a karateskills test. Suchpromotionsareinherentto the martialartsand
theyrepresentstandardizedprogressionto thenextskill level.
In lightof theabove,thepetitionerhasnotestablishedthathemeetsthiscriterion.
Page7
(ii) Documentationof the alien's membershipin associationsin the field for which
classification is sought,which require outstandingachievementsof their members,as
judgedbyrecognizednationalor internationalexpertsin theirdisciplinesorfields.
In orderto demonstratethat membershipin an associationmeetsthis criterion,a petitionermust
showthattheassociationrequiresoutstandingachievementasanessentialconditionfor admissionto
membership.Membershiprequirementsbasedon employmentor activity in a givenfield, minimum
educationor experience,proficiencycertifications,standardizedtest scores,gradepoint average,
recommendationsby colleaguesor currentmembers,or paymentof dues,do not satisfythis criterion
as suchrequirementsdo not constituteoutstandingachievements.Further,the overall prestigeof a
given associationis not determinative;the issue here is membershiprequirementsrather than the
association'soverall reputation.
The petitioner submitted evidenceof his membershipin the Nepal ShotokanKarate Association
(NSKA), FSKA, KaretenomichiWorld Federation(KWF), World Elite Black Belt Society
(WEBBS), and JapanKarate Association (JKA) of New York. The record, however, does not
include evidenceof the membershiprequirementsfor the precedingorganizations. The petitioner
submitted an April 15, 2008 letter from General Secretaryof the NSKA,
statinc that the NSKA "is a national karateorganizationthat promotesthe Shotokanstyle Karate."
letter doesnot explain how the petitioner waschosento be a memberof theNSKA or
specify the criteria used in judging his application or nomination. The petitioner also submitteda
letter from Presidentof the JKA, New York, stating that the petitioner is "the
designatedcountry representative"and is thereforethe only authorizedpersonto openandestablish
a karatebranchusingtheJKA's name. This letterdoesnot indicatehow thepetitionerwaschosen
asthe representativeanddoesnot statethat he was chosenbasedon outstandingachievementor that
the choicewas madeby recognizednationalor internationalexpertsin his field. On appeal,the
petitionersubmitsgeneralinformationabouttheJKA from its websitestatingthattheassociationhas
"a vastmembership"andis "the world's largestandmostprestigiouskarateorganization." The
submittedinformation does not indicate that the JKA requiresoutstandingachievementas a
prerequisitefor membershipand instead,the vast numberswho belongsuggestthat outstanding
achievementis not required. Finally, althoughby its namethe WEBBS would be restrictive in its
membershipto thosepersonswho earneda black belt, earninga black belt is not indicativeof
outstandingachievementsas it reflectsa level of martial arts proficiencythat manypeoplehave
achievedbasedontheir successfulcompletionof a skillstest.
In responseto thedirector'srequestfor evidence,thepetitionersubmitteda Diplomaof Certification
and Appointmentfrom the IMAA designatinghim as an authorizedinstructorand Sempaion
January26, 2008. Thepetitioner'sappointmentpost-datesthe petition'sJune27, 2007filing date.
As previously discussed,a petitionermust establisheligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R.
§§103.2(b)(1),(12); Matter of Katigbak,14 I&N Dec.at 49. Accordingly,the AAO will not
considerthisevidencein thisproceeding.
Page8
In this case,thereis no evidence(such as membershipbylaws or rules of admission)from the
NSKA, FSKA, KWF, WEBBS, IMAA, or the JKA showing that they require outstanding
achievementsof their members,asjudged by recognizednationalor internationalexpertsin the
petitioner'sfield. Accordingly,thepetitionerhasnotestablishedthathemeetsthiscriterion.
(iii) Publishedmaterialaboutthealienin professionalor major tradepublicationsor
othermajormedia,relatingto thealien'swork in thefield for whichclassificationis
sought.Suchevidenceshall includethetitle,date,andauthorof thematerial,andany
necessarytranslation.
In general,in orderforpublishedmaterialtomeetthiscriterion,it mustbeprimarilyaboutthepetitioner
and,asstatedin theregulations,beprintedin professionalor majortradepublicationsor othermajor
media. To qualify as major media, the publicationshouldhave significant nationalor international
distribution. Somenewspapers,suchastheNew YorkTimes,nominally servea particularlocality but
wouldqualifyasmajormediabecauseof significantnationaldistribution,unlikesmalllocalcommunity
papers.4
Thepetitionersubmittedphotographsof him appearingin theFSKAVII WorldChampionships18*
AnnualProgramBookletandYearbook,theFSKA VIII World Championships19thAnnualProgram
BookletandYearbook,the NSKA Bulletin for the 2005InternationalInvitationalShotokanKarate
Championship,andtheNSKA ShotokanKarate"Souvenir- 2062"programbook. Thepetitioneralso
submittedeventresultsin FSK SportsMagazineandan eventprogramlisting the petitioneramong
dozensof participantswhocompetedin theKWF ChampionshiponAugust3, 2003in Nagano,Japan.
Thepetitioner'sevidencealsoincludeda captionedphotographof him (two sentenceswith no author
identified)in the December24, 2006GorkhaPatra. Theplain languageof this regulatorycriterion
requiresthe submissionof "[p]ublishedmaterialabout the alien in professionalor major trade
publicationsor othermajormedia"including"thetitle,date,andauthorof thematerial."Thepreceding
photographsof thepetitionerandparticipantlistingsdonotmeettheserequirements.
Thepetitionersubmittedthefollowingarticles:
1. "UnexpectedGoldMedalforNepal,"publishedintheNovember11,2005Rajdhani;
2. "InternationalSkillful Karate Player[the petitioner],"publishedin SherpaPratibimba
(2005);
3. "FollowingtheFootprintsof PembainJapan,"publishedin Rajdhani;
4. "[The petitioner]:TalentedInternationalkaratekain thearenaof Nepalikarate,"published
in TajaKhabar;
5. "KarateShouldnot beTakenonly asa Competitionanda Gameof WinningandLosing,"
publishedinShotokanKarate;
4Evenwith nationally-circulatednewspapers,considerationmustbegivento theplacementof thearticle. Forexample,
anarticlethatappearsin the WashingtonPost,but in a sectionthatis distributedonly in FairfaxCounty,Virginia, for
instance,cannotserveto spreadanindividual'sreputationoutsideof thatcounty.
Pagel1
10 yearsand I can stronglyvouch for his outstandingcharacterand professionalismas a
sportsmanandhumanbeing.. . . [The petitioner]lived in JapanandstudiedKarateunder
manygreatKarateMasters.His experiencesin Japanandabroadgivehim VERY UNIQUE
knowledgeandaVERY UNIQUE approachto teachingourart.
Theletterfrom Professor doesnot specifyexactlywhatthepetitioner'soriginalcontributions
in the sportof karatehavebeen,nor is thereanexplanationindicatinghow any suchcontributions
were of major significancein his field. It is not enoughto be knowledgeableandto haveothers
attestto that knowledge.An alienmusthavedemonstrablyimpactedhis field in orderto meetthis
regulatorycriterion.
In res onseto the director's requestfor evidence,the petitioner submittedan April 15,2008 letter
from stating:
Peoplewho wantto learnandtrain in Karatego to Japanto betterunderstandKarate.
I ikewise, [the petitioner] also acquiredhis knowledgeandtraining in Karatefrom JKA. IIe
remainedin Japanfor sevenyearsand returnedto Nepal asa highly skilled andoutstanding
player. [The petitioner] is one of the very few Nepali Karateplayers,who havetrainedand
acquiredknowledgeofKarate in Japan,by remainingin Japanfor sucha longperiodof time.
Further,he is theonly suchplayer to returnto Nepalto instructandfurther developKaratein
Nepal. Due to his understandingof Japaneselanguageand his training in Japan, [the
petitioner] had the in depthknowledgeof Karate,both it's [sic] practical theoreticaland
cultural aspects. Suchan in depth understandingis very rare amongNepali Karateplayers
becauseof their lack of languageskills andextensivetraining in Japan.
While the petitioner has competedm tournaments,participated in extensive karate training, and
instructed his students,theseactivities do not equateto "original" athletic contributions of major
significancein the field. Rather,the petitionerwascompetmgm, learning,andteachinga well
establishedmartial artsstyle. Accordingto the regulationat 8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3)(v),an alien's
contributionsmustbenotonly originalbut of majorsignificance.Wemustpresumethatthephrase
"major significance"is not superfluousand,thus,that it hassomemeaning. Thereis nothingto
demonstratethat the petitioner'sspecificcontributionsin the field were original, suchas a new
methodof instructionor modifiedkaratetechniques.Nor is thereevidencedemonstratingthatany
of his contributionswereof majorsignificancein thefield, suchasthroughthewidespreadadoption
of his specificmethodsof instruction. Masteringandsubsequentlyteachinganexistingmartialart
form is not demonstrativeof an original contributionto the field. While this suggeststhat the
petitioneris knowledgeableand skilled in karate,it doesnot establishthat he hasmadeoriginal
athletic contributionsof major significancein the field. Although the petitionerhasearnedthe
admirationof his references,there is no evidencedemonstratingthat his impacton the sport is
commensuratewith anoriginalathleticcontributionof majorsignificancein thefield.
In this case,the lettersof supportsubmittedby thepetitionerarenot sufficientto meetthis criterion.
USCISmay,in its discretion,useasadvisoryopinionsstatementssubmittedasexperttestimony.
Page12
SeeMatter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Commr. 1988). However,USCIS is
ultimately responsiblefor making the final determinationregardingan alien's eligibility for the
benefitsought.Id. Thesubmissionof lettersfromexpertssupportingthepetitionis notpresumptive
evidenceof eligibility; USCISmayevaluatethe contentof thoselettersasto whetherthey support
the alien's eligibility. Seeid. at 795. Thus,the contentof the writers' statementsandhow they
becameawareof the petitioner'sreputationare importantconsiderations.Even when written by
independentexperts,letterssolicitedby an alien in supportof an immigrationpetition areof less
weight than preexisting,independentevidencethat one would expectof a karatecompetitoror
instructor who has made original contributions of major significance. Without extensive
documentation showing that the petitioner's work equates to original contributions of major
significancein his field, we cannotconcludethathemeetsthis criterion.
(†ii)Evidenceof the display of the alien's work in thefield at artistic exhibitionsor
showcases.
In the original submission,counselclaimsthatphotographstakenof thepetitionerfrom throughouthis
careermeetthis criterion. The petitioner's field, however,is not in the arts. The plain languageof
this regulatory criterion indicates that it applies to artists rather than to karate competition and
instruction. The ten criteria in the regulations are designedto cover different areas;not every
criterion will apply to every occupation. The petitioner's participation and successin karate
competitionshave alreadybeen addressedunder the awardscriterion at 8 C.F.R. §204.5(h)(3)(i).
Virtually every athlete"displays" his work in the senseof competingin front of an audience. The
petitionerhasnot establishedthat his participationin competitionscomparesto the artistic showcases
contemplatedby this regulationfor artists. Accordingly,thepetitionerhasnotestablishedthathemeets
this criterion.
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for
organizationsor establishmentsthathavea distinguishedreputation.
Thepetitionerclaimseligibility underthis criterionby virtueof hisparticipationwith theNSKA asa
SeniorInstructorandlateranAssistantChiefInstructor. On appeal,thepetitionersubmitsa June9,
2008 letter from MemberSecretaryof the NepaliNationalSportsCouncil,
statingthatthe NSKA "has beencommittedtowardsthe progressanddevelopmentof the sportof
Karatesinceitsveryinceptionthroughparticipationando anizationof variousKarateChampionships
within zonal, nationaland internationallevel." er statesthat the NSKA has held
"championshipevents"includingthe 3rdAsianS oto anKarateChampionship.TheApril 15,2008
letter from statesthat the NSKA "is a national karateorganizationin Nepal that
promotestheShotokanstyleKarate." Theprecedingstatementsprovidegeneralinformationaboutthe
NSKA, but thereis no supportingevidenceshowingthat the NSKA hasa distinguishedreputation.
Further,the documentationsubmittedb the etitionerdoesnot establishthathis role for theNSKA
wasleadingor critical. Theletterfrom states:
[T]heNSKAoffered[thepetitioner]thepositionof SeniorInstructorrightawayin Novemberof
2005.No otherNepaliKarateplayerhasreturnedfromJapanwith sucha longandextensive
Page13
trainingin Japanto teachandinstructin Nepal. Therefore,[thepetitioner]wasuniqueamong
our instructors.Since[thepetitioner]couldinstructKaratein Japanesestyleby explainingthe
basicsof Karate,thetermsof whichareall in Japaneselanguage.Forthis reason,evenSouth
Asian instructorsand playersfrom India, PakistanandBangladeshcameto train with [the
petitioner]fromtimeto time. [Thepetitioner]waspromotedto AssistantChiefInstructor[o]n
December23,2006becauseof hisoutstandingperformance.
The left side of letter identifies multiple positionsin the NSKA such as Chief
Instructor,President, ice- resi ent,GeneralSecretary,Secretary,Treasurer,andMembers' There
is no organizationalchartor otherevidencedocumentinghow thepetitioner'sSeniorInstructorandan
AssistantChief Instructorpositionsfell within thegeneralhierarchyof theNSKA. Moreover,without
specific information regardinghis duties and an explanationof the relevanceor importanceof his
positionswithin the hierarchyof theNSKA, we cannotconcludethat his role for the associationwas
leading or critical. The submitted evidence does not establishthat that the petitioner has been
responsiblefor the successor standingof the NSKA to a degreeconsistentwith the meaningof
"leading or critical role." Finally, section 203(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act requiresthe submissionof
extensive evidence. Consistent with that statutory requirement, the regulation at 8 C.F.R.
§204.5(h)(3)(viii) requiresthe submissionof evidenceof a leadingor critical role for more than one
distinguishedorganizationor establishment.
In light of theabove,thepetitionerhasnotestablishedthathemeetsthiscriterion.
Summary
In this case,we concurwith the director's determinationthat the petitionerhasfailed to demonstrate
his receiptof a major, internationallyrecognizedaward,or that he meetsat leastthreeof the ten
categoriesof evidence that must be satisfied to establishthe minimum eligibility requirements
necessaryto qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). A final merits
determinationthatconsidersall of theevidencefollows.
B. Final MeritsDetermination
In accordancewith the Kazarianopinion,we mustnext conducta final meritsdeterminationthat
considersall of the evidencein the contextof whetheror not the petitionerhasdemonstrated:(1) a
"level of expertiseindicatingthat the individual is oneof that small percentagewho haverisento the
very top of the[ir] field of endeavor,"8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2);and(2) "that the alien hassustained
nationalor internationalacclaimandthathisor herachievementshavebeenrecognizedin thefield of
expertise."Section203(b)(1)(A)of theAct; 8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(3).SeealsoKazarian,596F.3dat
1119-1120.In the presentmatter,manyof the deficienciesin the documentationsubmittedby the
petitioner have alreadybeenaddressedin our precedingdiscussionof the regulatorycriteria at
8C.F.R.§§204.5(h)(3)(i),(ii), (iii), (iv), (v),(vii), and(viii).
Thepetitioner'snameis not listedamongtheexecutiveofficersor thesevenMembersof theNSKA identifiedonthe
association'sletterhead.
Page14
Regardingtheawardssubmittedby thepetitionerfor 8 C.F.R.§§204.5(h)(3)(i),thereis no evidence
showingthathefacedtop nationalor internationalkaratecompctitorsin generalratherthanlimited
to those competingin the Shotokankaratestyle. Without evidenceshowingthat he faced a
significantpool of top karatecompetitorsin Nepal,the UnitedStates,or internationally,we cannot
concludethat the submittedawardsdemonstratehis sustainednationalor internationalacclaim.
Awardswon by the petitionerin age-restrictedtournaments,m competitivedivisionswith only a
limited pool of entrants,or in competitionsnot shown to have a level of statureand scope
comparableto thoseidentifiedon the USA NationalKarate-doFederation(USA-NKF) websitedo
not establishthathe "is oneof thatsmallpercentagewhohaverisento the very top of the field of
endeavor"0 See8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2). USCIShaslong held thatevenathletesperformingat the
major leaguelevel do not automaticallymeetthe "extraordinaryability" standard. Matter of Price,
20 I&N Dec.953,954(Assoc.Commr.1994);56Fed.Reg.at60899.7Likewise,it doesnot follow
thatanathletewhohasreceivedawardsin age-restrictedcompetition,obscuretournaments,or event
categoriesand divisions with only a small pool of entrantsshould necessarilyqualify for an
extraordinaryability employment-basedimmigrantvisa. To find otherwisewould contravenethe
regulatoryrequirementat 8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2)thatthis visa categorybe reservedfor "that small
percentageof individuals that haverisen to the very top of their field of endeavor." Further,
regardingthe petitioner's"Best Playerof theYear2005"award,thereis no evidenceindicatingthat
thisawardis commensuratewith sustainednationalor internationalacclaimattheverytopof thefield.
Despitethenameof theaward"BestPlayer"implyinga singlewinner,it appearsthatmultipleawards
weregiven.
With regardto the evidencesubmittedfor theregulatorycriterionat 8 C.F.R.§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv),the
petitionersubmittedno evidencedemonstratingthe reputation,significance,or magnitudeof the
"first Asian ShotokanKarateChampionship"in February2005or the level of expertiseof those
purportedly"refereed"by him. Moreover,we notethatthepetitionerhassubmittedevidenceof his
The USA-NKFis sanctionedby the U.S.OlympicCommitteeandis "the NationalGoverningBody for theSportof
Karatein theUnitedStates."TheUSA-NKF'swebsiteidentifieskaratecompetitionssuchastheUSAOpen,theUSA
Karate Nationals, the World Championships,the PanAmerican Games,the World Cup, and the World Games. See
lytg;//www.usankf.org/inlexphploption com content&viewarticle&id=1&ltemid=2.accessedon August 16, 2010,
copy incorporatedinto therecordof proceeding.
While we acknowledgethat a district court's decisionis not binding precedent,we notethat in Matter of Racine,1995
WL 153319at *4 (N.D. Ill. Feb.16,1995),thecourtstated:
[T]he plain readingof the statutesuggeststhat the appropriatefield of comparisonis not a comparisonof
Racine'sability with that of all the hockeyplayersat all levelsof play; but rather.Racine'sability as a
professionalhockeyplayerwithin theNHL. Thisinterpretationisconsistentwith at leastoneothercourtin this
district,Grimsonv./NS,No.93C 3354,(N.D.lll September9, 1993),andthedefinitionof theterm8C.F.R.
§_204.5(h)(2),andthediscussionsetforthinthepreambleat56Fed.Reg.60898-99.
Althoughthe presentcasearosewithin thejurisdictionof anotherfederaljudicial districtandcircuit,the court's
reasoningindicatesthatUSCIS'interpretationof theregulationat8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2)isreasonable.
Page15
participationasa "referee"for only onecompetition.The statuteandregulations,however,require
"extensivedocumentation"andthepetitionertodemonstratethathisnationalor internationalacclaimin
the sport of karate has been sustained. See section 203(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C.
§ ll53(b)(1)(A)(i), and 8C.F.R. §204.5(h)(3). The documentationsubmittedfor 8C.F.R.
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv)is notextensiveor commensuratewith sustainednationalor internationalacclaim.
While the petitionerhasearnedtherespectandadmirationof his references,theevidenceof record
falls shortof demonstratinghis sustainednationalor internationalacclaimasa karatecompetitoror
instructor. Theconclusionwe reachby consideringtheevidenceto meeteachcriterionat 8 C.F.R.
§ 204.5(h)(3)separatelyis consistentwith a reviewof theevidencein the aggregate.Evenin the
aggregate,the evidencedoesnot distinguishthe petitionerasoneof the smallpercentagewho has
risento theverytopof thefield of endeavor.8 C.F.R.§204.5(h)(2).
III. Conclusion
Reviewof therecorddoesnotestablishthatthepetitionerhasdistinguishedhimselfto suchanextent
thathemaybesaidto haveachievedsustainednationalor internationalacclaimandto bewithin the
smallpercentageat the very top of his field. The evidenceis not persuasivethat the petitioner's
achievementssethim significantlyabovealmostall othersin his field at a nationalor international
level. Therefore,thepetitionerhasnot establishedeligibility pursuantto section203(b)(1)(A)of the
Act andthepetitionmaynotbeapproved.
An applicationor petitionthat fails to complywith the technicalrequirementsof the law may be
deniedby the AAO evenif the ServiceCenterdoesnot identify all of the groundsfor denialin the
initial decision.SeeSpencerEnterprises.Inc. v. UnitedStates.229F. Supp.2d at 1043,affd, 345
F.3d at 683; seealso Soltanev. DOJ, 381 F.3d at 145(notingthat the AAO conductsappellate
review on a denovobasis).
Thepetitionwill bedeniedfor theabovestatedreasons,with eachconsideredasanindependentand
alternativebasisfor denial. In visa petitionproceedings,the burdenof proving eligibility for the
benefitsoughtremainsentirelywith thepetitioner.Section291of the Act, 8 U.S.C.§ 1361. Here,
thatburdenhasnotbeenmet.
ORDER: Theappealisdismissed.