dismissed EB-1A Case: Ballet

U.S. Department of flomeland Security 
identifying data deleted to 
U S C~tlzenshlp and Irnrn~grat~on Serv~ces 
Office of Administrntive Appeals MS 2090 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
 Washington, DC 20529-2090 
invasion of personal privacy 
 U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
pmG COPY Services 
FILE: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: JUN 0 5 2009 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 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 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
6Zr---//>-- 
/oh F. Grissom, 
/ 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification of the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of 
extraordinary ability in the arts. The director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national 
or international acclaim of the beneficiary necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary 
ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that the beneficiary meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Pnority 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 ths 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 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained national or international 
acclaim" that the statute requires. 
 8 C.F.R. $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 regulatory criteria. Id. However, the weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(h)(4), must depend on the extent to which such evidence 
demonstrates, reflects, or is consistent with sustained 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. $204.5(h)(2). 
This petition, filed on April 5, 2007, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary ability as 
a ballerina. The petitioner initially submitted evidence about the beneficiary's previous performances, letters 
of recommendation, programs, news articles, and information about dancers' salaries. In response to a 
- Page 3 
Request for Evidence ("RFE") dated March 18, 2008, the petitioner submitted additional letters of 
recommendation, information about the beneficiary's salary, information about events judged, and 
information about ballet companies with which the beneficiary has danced. 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
Counsel argues that the beneficiary established eligibility under this criterion by virtue of her selection to 
participate in the Meridian de Oro award shows in 1994 and 1995. The petitioner submitted two letters from 
executive producer of the Meridiano de Oro Awards show, stating that the beneficiary participated 
in the 1994 and 1995 shows. Those letters do not state that the beneficiary was selected after "fiercely 
competitive auditions" as alleged by counsel on appeal or otherwise set forth the criteria used to select dancers for 
those shows. The fact that the Meridiano de Oro is an awards show does not mean that being asked to perform on 
the show is an award. In addition, the petitioner submitted no evidence about the Meridiano de Oro Awards show 
to demonstrate that participation in that show conveyed national or international acclaim or that selection to 
participate in those shows are recognized as awards for excellence witlun the field. 
Even if these selections constituted awards and the awards were nationally or internationally recognized, the 
award shows were held in 1994 and 1995, i.e. more than ten years prior to the filing of this petition, so cannot 
demonstrate sustained acclaim as required by section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A)(i) 
and 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which class$cation is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international 
experts in their disciplines or fields. 
Counsel argues that the beneficiary meets this criterion by virtue of her receipt of a scholarship to attend the 
Venezuelan National Cultural Council Professional Dancers Workshop (the "Workshop") and her selection to 
attend the 2008 National Choreographers Initiative. The 2008 Workshop and qualifying auditions occurred 
almost two years after this petition was filed. A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of 
filing. 8 C.F.R. $9 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I. & N. Dec. 45, 49 (Comm. 1971). The 
petitioner submitted a certificate documenting the beneficiary's participation with the Workshop. No 
evidence was submitted showing that the beneficiary received a scholarship to attend the Workshop. Going 
on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of 
proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I. & N. Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of 
Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & N. Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). Regardless as to whether the 
beneficiary received a scholarship to attend, the petitioner presented no evidence to show that any sort of 
association of dancers who have attended the Workshop exists or if attending the Workshop constitutes the 
beneficiary's membership in an association, how the beneficiary continues to be a member of that association, 
as required by the regulation, once her participation in the Workshop ended. 
Page 4 
For all of the above stated reasons, the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary is eligible under this 
criterion. 
(iii) 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 classiJication is sought. Such evidence shall include the 
title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
In general, in order for published material to meet ths criterion, it must be primarily about the petitioner and, as 
stated in the regulation, be printed in professional or major trade publications or other major media. To qualify as 
major media, the publication should have significant national or international distribution. An alien would not 
earn acclaim at the national level from a local publication. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, 
nominally serve a particular locality but would qualify as major media because of significant national distribution, 
unlike small local community papers.1 
The petitioner submitted translated excerpts of "The Dancers Make Themselves Dancing" and "Trump Card (2)," 
which appeared in El Nacional and a translated excerpt from an El Universal article. The translations submitted 
of these articles did not comply with the terms of 8 C.F.R. $ 103.2(b)(3), which requires that "[alny document 
containing foreign language submitted to USCIS shall be accompanied by a full English language translation 
which the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the translator's certification that he or she 
is competent to translate from the foreign language into English." The notations on these articles indicate that 
they are partial translations of the articles. As such, we are unable to ascertain their applicability to the 
criterion. In addition, the translated portions of the articles were significantly shorter than the article as a 
whole, indicating that the articles were not primarily about the alien as opposed to being about a performance 
as a whole. Lastly, although in the response to the RFE counsel states that both publications have highly 
daily circulations, 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 n.2 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I. & N. Dec. 1, 3 n.2 
(BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I. & N. Dec. 503,506 (BIA 1980). On appeal, counsel states that 
his statements are easily verified through an internet search, however, it is the petitioner's burden to provide 
all relevant information in support of the petition. 
The petitioner also submitted English language articles entitled "'Sleeping Beauty' a fanciful fairy tale" which 
appeared in the November 4,2003 The Register-Guard, "Dancers shine in charming 'Beauty"' which appeared in 
a November 2003 Idaho Statesman, "Nutcracker with a twist draws waves of applause" which appeared in the 
December 28,2003 Times Colonist, "'Nutcracker' a treat of music, movement" which appeared in the December 
19, 2004 The Register-Guard, "Beauty moves to the indoors for wet season" which appeared in the September 
14, 2006 The Register-Guard, "Sugar plum traditions" which appeared in the December 9, 2004 The Idaho 
Statesman, "Ballet Idaho couple brings Latin flavor to dance" which appeared in The Idaho Statesman, 
"'Nutcracker': Locals blend in with pros" which appeared in the November 2006 Billings Gazette, and 
"Discovery Ballet Idaho - Spanish style" which appeared in the January 14, 2005 Idaho Press-Tribune. These 
1 
Even with nationally-circulated newspapers, consideration must be given to the placement of the article. For 
example, an article that appears in the Washington Post, but in a section that is distributed only in Fairfax 
County, Virginia, for instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 5 
articles are not primarily about the beneficiary, but are instead primarily about select performances. In addition, 
the petitioner submits no evidence that the publications are professional, major trade publications or other major 
media. Instead, the names of the publications indicate that they are regonal publications. On appeal, counsel 
gave circulation statistics for The Times Colonist and The Register-Guard, however, counsel's statements do not 
amount to evidence and even if we accepted the statements, they evidence that the two publications are regional 
in nature and thus cannot amount to professional or major trade publications or other major media. 
On appeal, counsel states that the letter fiom 
 arts and culture critic for The Idaho Statesman, should 
also qualify the beneficiary under this criterion since The Idaho Statesman "is the most widely read newspaper in 
the state of Idaho." Not only does counsel not offer support for his statements, but a letter written by a journalist 
does not amount to published material as required by this criterion. As such, that letter will be considered under 
the discussion of 8 C.F.R. !j 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
In light of the above, the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(iv) 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 alliedjield of spec$cation for which classzjication is sought 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. !j 204.5(h)(3) provides that "a petition for an alien of extraordinary ability must be 
accompanied by evidence that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her 
achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Evidence of the petitioner's participation as a 
judge must be evaluated in terms of these requirements. The weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3)(iv), therefore, depends on the extent to which such evidence demonstrates, 
reflects, or is consistent with sustained 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. tj 204.5(h)(2). For example, judging a 
national competition or a competition for top artists is of far greater probative value than judging a regional, 
youth, or student competition. 
In support of the petitioner's argument that the beneficiary is eligible under this criterion, it submitted a letter 
from, associate dean at Boise State University, stating that the beneficiary served "as an external 
evaluator for [the] campus-wide Undergraduate Research Conference" and provided "comments about the 
best presentations by undergraduate dancers in [the] program." The only information submitted about this 
Conference was the Conference's brochure. The record in ths case does not include supporting evidence 
establishing the level of acclaim associated with the beneficiary's involvement in thls competition or with others 
involved as judges or participants. We do not find that evaluating amateur, student dancers is indicative of 
sustained national or international acclaim. 
Counsel notes that the court in Buletini v. INS, 860 F. Supp. 1222 (E.D. Mich. 1994), held that 8 C.F.R. 
204.5(h)(3)(iv) does not require that participating as a judge was the result of having extraordinary ability. Id. 
at 1231. In contrast to the broad precedential authority of the case law of a United States circuit court, the 
AAO is not bound to follow the published decision of a United States district court in cases arising within the 
same district. See Matter of K-S-, 20 I. & N. Dec. 715 (BIA 1993). The reasoning underlying a district 
judge's decision will be given due consideration when it is properly before the AAO; however, the analysis 
does not have to be followed as a matter of law. Id. at 7 19. 
Regardless, we do not find it violates the reasoning in Buletini, 860 F. Supp. at 123 1, to examine the evidence 
submitted as to whether it is indicative of or inconsistent with national or international acclaim. The court in 
Buletini was concerned that an alien would need to first demonstrate "extraordinary ability" in order to meet 
this criterion. We are not following this "circular exercise" that troubled the court. Rather, we are looking at 
the type of review responsibilities inherent to the field and what review responsibilities might be indicative of or 
at least consistent with national acclaim. Specifically, we cannot ignore that the beneficiary served as a judge of 
amateur dancers on a preliminary level. The petitioner submitted no evidence showing how serving as a 
preliminary judge at Boise State University conveyed national or international acclaim. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has failed to establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientz?~, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signz3cance in the$eld. 
Counsel asserts that the beneficiary is eligible by virtue of her performance of "the Venezuelan folk dance 
style and . . . an original ballet form" and because she "showcased her original style of salsa" during a 
performance with the Pink Martini Band. In support of this assertion, the petitioner submitted a March 29, 
2008 letter from, artistic director for the petitioner, the Eugene Ballet Company ("EBC"), which 
states that the EBC performance in conjunction with the Pink Martini Band resulted in sell out crowds in 
Eugene and Boise. The letter states that although the EBC as a whole were involved in the performance, the 
beneficiary 
introduced the folk dance style of Venezuela which was wholly integrated into the ballet. 
At the end of this highly successful evening, along with her husband . . ., [the beneficiary 
and her husband] brought down the house dancing their own style of salsa dancing to Brazil 
.accompanied [sic] by the Pink Martini Band. The performance was greeted with such 
enthusiasm and excitement the company attracted audience members from throughout the 
region with people flying in from San Francisco and Seattle to attend the performance. 
Although the letter states that the style was unique, the petitioner presented no evidence supporting those 
assertions. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of 
meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I. & N. Dec. 158, 165 (Cornm. 1998) 
(citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I. & N. Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). In addition, even 
assuming that the style is unique, which we do not, this letter does not indicate how the beneficiary's 
performance impacted the ballet field as a whole as opposed to contributing to the success of the EBC. The 
petitioner presented no evidence that others in the field have adopted the beneficiary's style of salsa. Such a 
demonstration may be made through other evidence such as, for example, national media discussions of the 
style's impact, letters attesting to the importance of the style to the development of dance, or other evidence 
that the style attracted significant attention in the particular field of dance. 
The petitioner also submitted numerous letters of recommendation. While letters such as these provide 
relevant information about an alien's experience and accomplishments, they cannot by themselves establish 
the alien's eligibility under this criterion because they do not demonstrate that the alien's work is of major 
significance in her field beyond the limited number of individuals with whom she has worked directly. Even 
when written by independent experts, letters solicited by an alien in support of an immigration petition carry 
less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of major contributions that one would expect of an alien 
who has achieved sustained national or international acclaim. 
A number of the letters submitted praise the beneficiary's skills or individual performances, such as the letter 
from cultural attach6 for Venezuela, stating that the beneficiary "is a classical dancer that 
has performed with the most important Venezuelan companies achieving high standards of quality and an 
excellent reputation . . . she is not only talented but disciplined, hardworking and very responsible," and the 
letter from , human development resource specialist, stating that the beneficiary has a 
"superior level of technical achievement and matur[e] artistic expression . . . clearly a professional level 
dancer." The letter from states that the beneficiary "achieves an extremely high level of technical 
precision that is clearly sets [sic] her securely in the top percentage of American dancers." Similar letters 
include the one from 
 of the American Guild of Musical Artists; -1 executive 
director of Ballet Ida 
 associate artistic director and ballet master 
with EBC and Ballet Idaho; 
 associate artistic director for education with Ballet Idaho; 
artistic director for the Ballet Nacional de Caracas; -1 
director of the Artist Service Program of the Idaho Commission on the Arts; - 
, ballet master at the Richmond Ballet; and , executive director of 
Caldwell Fine Arts. Although these letters are complimentary as to the beneficiary's skills and abilities as a 
ballerina, they do not state that she made an original contribution of major significance to the field. Those 
letters singling out particular performances of the beneficiary are not supported by other evidence, such as 
performance reviews or other media coverage, showing that those performances made original, major 
contributions to the field. 
Other letters submitted by the petitioner praise the beneficiary's performances and state that the beneficiary 
inspires other dancers to greater heights. These letters include the letter from 
 professor 
emeritus at the University of Oregon, which states that a company would benefit from having the beneficiary 
dance for it because she would inspire other dancers to "achieve an even higher level artistically" and- 
, who stated that "[the beneficiary] consistently holds herself to the highest artistic standards. Her 
pursuit of excellence and her willingness to explore has enabled her to continue to develop and deepen her 
already considerable creative abilities. . . . She is both an inspiration and an example to her colleagues." 
Again, although her talent is admired by those supplying letters of recommendation, those letters do not state 
that the beneficiary made an original, major contribution to the field. 
Lastly, the petitioner submitted letters praising the beneficiary's general style and creativity. 
 = 
president of Nuevo Mundo, states that the beneficiary "progressed and achieved technique and 
style [in the ten months that she danced with the Nuevo Mundo troupe] to the point where I know that she is 
destined to go ahead and at a fast pace in the artistic world. She has a strong technique and a unique natural 
talent." The letter from states that he rates her "as one of the most musical and creative dancers 
[he] ha[s] ever worked with." The letter fromstates that the beneficiary "has been an integral 
part of and the inspiration for the creation of several of [her] works. She is a unique artist with a riveting and 
compelling stage presence unequalled by her peers. Her technical ability is stunning and magnified by her 
acting skills. It is the rare performer who can interpret a role with such musicality and magic." These general 
statements do not state nor establish the beneficiary's effect on the field of ballet as a whole nor do they state 
that the beneficiary made some sort of original contribution to the field of dance as opposed to performing 
well. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in thefield at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner claimed eligibility under this criterion by virtue of her numerous performances evidenced by 
critical reviews and playbills. This criterion, however, generally relates to visual artists, such as sculptors and 
painters not ballet dancers like the beneficiary. Regardless, frequent performances are intrinsic to the dance 
profession. Duties or activities which nominally fall within a given criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) do not 
demonstrate national or international acclaim if they are inherent to the occupation itself. In the performing 
arts, national or international acclaim is generally not established by the mere act of appearing in public, but 
rather by attracting a substantial national or international audience. The record includes no evidence showing 
that the petitioner has attracted such a following. The regulations establish separate criteria, especially for 
those whose work is in the performing arts, under 8 C.F.R. 9 203.5(h)(3)(x). The beneficiary's role with the 
various dance companies is also considered under 8 C.F.R. 3 203.5(h)(3)(viii). The petitioner failed to show 
that the beneficiary was either the main attraction at any of the exhibitions or showcases or her participation 
was otherwise indicative of sustained national or international acclaim. To the extent that counsel urges us to 
consider the beneficiary's selection for the "4x4 White Bird Project," that selection and performance occurred 
after this petition was filed. A petitioner must establish the beneficiary's eligibility at the time of filing. 
8 C.F.R. $9 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I. & N. Dec. at 49. 
In addition to the performances of the beneficiary, counsel urges us to look at the contribution that the 
beneficiary made to her community through outreach programs. Although many of the letters discussed 
under 8 C.F.R. 203.5(h)(3)(v) detail the beneficiary's participation in these programs, the petitioner 
provides no evidence as to either how her community service constitutes an exhibition or showcase or how 
participation in any such exhibition or showcase conveyed national or international acclaim. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has per$ormed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments 
that have a distinguished reputation. 
In order to establish that the beneficiary performed a leading or critical role for an organization or 
establishment with a distinguished reputation, the petitioner must establish the nature of the beneficiary's role 
within the entire organization or establishment and the reputation of the organization or establishment. The 
petitioner claimed that the beneficiary was eligible under this criterion through her work with the Ballet 
Nacional de Caracas Teresa Carreno, Ballet Nuevo Mundo de Caracs, Ballet Contemporaneo de Caracas, and 
the EBC. 
The information submitted about the Ballet Nacional de Caracas Teresa Carreno states that the company is 
affiliated with the Teatro Teres a Carrefio owned by the Venezuelan government. The letter submitted from 
-states that the BNM "is considered as Artistic Ambassadors of Venezuela." The information 
about the Ballet Nuevo Mundo ("BNM") states that the company travels the world to perform and "is 
regarded as a pioneering company." This information comes from the website Wikipedia. There are no 
assurances about the reliability of the content from this open, user-edited internet site.2 As such, we will not 
give significant weight to claims for which Wikipedia is the only cited source. The information about the 
Ballet Contemporaneo de Caracas ("BCDC") provided from the company's own website states that it is "one 
of the most successful dance companies in south [sic] America." The letter from states that the 
Ballet Nacional and the BNM are "prestigious companies," but includes no specifics about what her opinion 
is based upon. 
Even if the petitioner had established the reputations of the companies with which the beneficiary previously 
danced, the petitioner did not present evidence that the beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role for 
those companies. The programs submitted for Ballet Teresa Carrefio and the Ballet Nacional show that the 
beneficiary danced in roles other than the lead and was not otherwise receiving top billing. For example, the 
program for the Ballet Nacional production of "Coppelia" lists two ballerinas sharing responsibility for 
dancing the part of Swanilda while the beneficiary danced as a "friend of Swanilda." These types of roles do 
not indicate that the beneficiary played a leading or critical role for these ballet companies as compared to, for 
example, other principal dancers and even the artistic management. 
In the initial submission, the information about the petitioner stated that it was founded in 1978 and "has 
grown to become the West's busiest and most versatile dance company." The petitioner states that it has "an 
active touring program" throughout the world and performed "over 100 performance and educational services 
in 36 states" during the 1995-1996 season and also received the Oregon Governor's Arts Award. This 
information does not establish the EBC's reputation as opposed to providing history about the company. 
Even if the reputation of the EBC had been shown to be distinguished, the petitioner submitted no evidence to 
show that the beneficiary performs in a leading or critical role for the company. Although the evidence reflects 
that the beneficiary has performed in leading roles in EBC productions and her image has been used in EBC 
2 
 Online content from Wikipedia is subject to the following general disclaimer: 
Wikipedia is an online open-content collaborative encyclopedia, that is, a voluntary 
association of individuals and groups working to develop a common resource of human 
knowledge. The structure of the project allows anyone with an Internet connection to alter its 
content. Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by people 
with the expertise required to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information. 
. . . Wikipedia cannot guarantee the validity of the information found here. The content of 
any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or altered by someone whose 
opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields. 
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disclaimers, accessed on April 15, 2009. 
marketing campaigns, nothing in the record distinguishes her from the other 20 soloists or principals in the 
company let alone its artistic management. We note that the posters submitted with the beneficiary's image do 
not contain her name, but instead only contain the name of as artistic director. Accordingly, the 
petitioner has not established that the beneficiary was responsible for the EBT's success or standing to a degree 
consistent with the meaning of "leading or critical role" and indicative of sustained national or international 
acclaim. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signijicantly high remuneration for 
services, in relation to others in thejeld. 
The petitioner submitted a letter frommanaging director of EBC, which states that the beneficiary 
receives "approximately $730 per week" and that her salary would be increased in 2008. The information also 
indicates that the beneficiary only received that salary for 28 weeks of the year. The report submitted from the 
U.S. Department of Labor states that the average wage for a dancer in the Eugene, Oregon area is between $8.12 
and $15.89 per hour. In response to the RFE, counsel listed the salaries of principle dancers in "professional 
ballet companies of similar budget and size," which showed that the beneficiary's salary is one of the highest in 
that category. Counsel cited DanceNSA as the source of the salary figures, but did not submit actual 
documentation from DanceNSA. First, without documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of 
counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute 
evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I. & N. Dec. at 534 n.2; Matter oflaureano, 19 I. & N. Dec. at 3 n.2; Matter 
of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I. & N. Dec. at 506. Second, even if we were to accept counsel's representations as true, 
which we do not, counsel impermissibly narrowed the field to the salaries of dance companies similar in size to 
EBC. The criterion requires that the petitioner establish that the salary that the beneficiary receives be higher than 
others in the field of ballet. The petitioner submitted no information as to what lunds of salaries are received by 
ballerinas at other companies of different sizes, and therefore no meaningful comparison can be made to 
determine that the beneficiary's salary is significantly high in relation to others in her field. In addition, the 
information provided by counsel indicates that the beneficiary receives the average salary withln the EBC instead 
of a salary significantly higher than those in her own company. 
As a result, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the beneficiary's eligibility under this criterion. 
(x) Evidence of commercial successes in the pe$orming arts, as shown by box ofice receipts or record, 
cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
The petitioner claims the beneficiary's eligibility under this criterion through the purported increase in ticket sales 
of the EBC after the company began using the beneficiary's image in its promotional materials. In support of thls 
claim, the petitioner submitted a April 10, 2008 letter from stating that the beneficiary's "exotic 
appeal7' and "large following in [the] community based on her talent and the roles she has performed in the past" 
led the EBC to use her image in its marketing campaign. After the beneficiary's image was used, "ticket sales . . . 
well exceeded [the EBC's] projections." Specifically, 
 stated that the EBC's income for the 
productions of Carmen and A Midsummer Night's Dream was $20,000 more than projected. Similarly, when the 
EBC used the beneficiary's image in marketing for the 2004-2005 season, stated that ticket sales 
increased by 112 for a net increase in revenue of $15,120. The petitioner submitted no sales receipts, statements 
of income, or other evidence to support the statements of and these brief assertions are insufficient to 
establish that EBC's increased income was attributable to the beneficiary. 
Counsel also states that the beneficiary qualifies under this criterion by virtue of the money raised during 
charity auctions for workshops with her. Although evidence appears in the record to verify the amounts bid 
for workshops for dance lessons given by the beneficiary for charity, the petitioner fails to present evidence as 
to how charity proceeds amount to commercial success as contemplated by this criterion. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Counsel states that the evidence regarding membership, judging, and the letters of recommendation should be 
considered under the comparable evidence provision. This evidence noted by counsel was addressed in the 
discussion of the relevant criteria above. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(4) allows for the submission 
of "comparable evidence," but only if the ten criteria "do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation." 
The regulatory language precludes the consideration of comparable evidence in this case, as there is no 
evidence that eligibility in the petitioner's occupation cannot be established by the ten criteria specified by the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). In fact, counsel has already argued in this proceeding that the petitioner 
meets eight of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3). The evidence submitted by the petitioner directly 
applies to the above criteria, as argued by counsel throughout the proceeding, and does not demonstrate 
sustained national or international acclaim. Where an alien is simply unable to meet three of the regulatory 
criteria, the plain language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(4) does not allow for the submission of 
comparable evidence. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary received a major, internationally 
recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. fj 204.5(h)(3). Review 
of the record does not establish that the beneficiary has distinguished herself to such an extent that she may be 
said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within the small percentage at the 
very top of her field. The evidence is not persuasive that the beneficiary's achievements set her significantly 
above almost all others in her field at a national or international level. Therefore, the petitioner has not 
established the beneficiary's 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. 9 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.