dismissed EB-1A Case: Business

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
identifying data 
pmnt clearly 
h-ofpe-phaq 
PUBLIC Copy 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: EAC 04 010 5 1841 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: SP 0 7 2005 
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. 5 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. 
U 
wbert P. Wiemann. Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to classify 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. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of 
extraordinary ability in business. The director determined the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary 
has earned the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are aliens 
described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with Extraordinary Ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim 
and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive 
documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry to the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the 
individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has sustained 
national or international acclaim and recognition in his field of expertise are set forth in the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that 
the petitioner must show that the beneficiary has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very 
top level. 
On appeal, counsel cites the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(0)(3)(iii), however, these criteria relate to 
the "nonimmigrant" extraordinary ability classification. The appropriate citation of the corresponding 
regulation for extraordinary ability classification pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act is 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). 
This petition, filed on October 14, 2003, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as the president of a company that distributes air-fresheners and other automotive accessories to car washes, 
detailing operations, lube centers, convenience stores, gas stations, and auto parts stores. 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 3 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized 
award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at least three of 
which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Published materials about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classijication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The director's decision stated: 
The record contains evidence to establish that the beneficiary and his company have appeared in various 
publications, including Modem Car Care and America's Car Care Business. However, the articles are 
about selling and marketing car care products, and none of the articles are specifically about [the 
beneficiary] or the company. While he is quoted in several of the articles, they are not about his success 
and do not support the claim that he is an alien of extraordinary ability in business. 
In order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be primarily about the beneficiary and, as stated in 
the regulations, 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 or international level from a local publication or from a publication with limited 
distribution. 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.' 
The petitioner submitted articles of which the beneficiary was the author such as '- 
(Modem Car Care, June 2000) an ' (Modem Car Care, December 2001). The 
beneficiary's authorship of articles o addressed under a subsequent criterion. 
The following evidence submitted by the petitioner represents paid advertisements or promotional pieces rather 
than published material about the alien: 
1. Page 94 of the April 2001 issue of Professional Car Washing and Detailing (author not provided) 
2. Pages 92 and 95 of the May 2001 issue of America's Car Care Business (author not provided) 
3. February 2002 issue of Modem Car Care (page number and author not provided) 
4. Page 90 of the March 2002 issue of CSP Convenience store/ ~etroleum~ (author not provided) 
5. Page 37 of the October 2002 issue of CSP Convenience Store / Petroleum (author not provided) 
I 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, Virginla, cannot 
serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. Furthermore, a petitioner cannot satisfy this criterion 
merely by purchasing an advertisement in a trade publication. 
CSP Convenience Store/ Petroleurn identifies itself as a "SUPPLIER SOURCEBOOK." 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 4 
Items 1 through 5 above reflect promotional exposure rather than national or international acclaim. 
The petitioner submitted only the first page of an article entitled "Pina Colada or New Car Smell? Follow your 
nose to air freshener success" in the September 2000 issue of Modem Car Care. The incomplete portion of the 
article that was submitted devotes 15 sentences to the beneficiary. From the limited material presented, we are 
unable to determine if the beneficiary and his company were the main subject of this article. 
An article entitled "Using the EXPRESS Lane: What your express detailing package should include and how to 
market it" in the April 2001 issue of America's Car Care Business offers quoted advice from the beneficiary but 
it is not about him or his company. The petitioner did not provide the name of the author of this article as 
required by the regulation. 
A newsletter entitled Northeast Canvasher includes a brief article about the New England Carwash Association's 
(NECA) Annual Spring Table Top Show and an upcoming NECA golf outing (the beneficiary is not mentioned 
in the article). Four photographs of individuals attending the Spring Table Top Show appear below the article, 
one of which pictures the beneficiary. The photograph picturing the beneficiary, however, is not qualifying 
published material about the alien. 
The petitioner submitted a portion of an article "continued from page 20 of the March 2002 issue of Professional 
Car Washing and Detailing. The incomplete article lists multiple vending products becoming available in 2002. 
Six sentences about the beneficiary's fuzzy bear and rabbit air fresheners appear on page 22 along with 
information about products from at least four other different companies. From the limited material presented, it is 
apparent that the beneficiary and his company were not the main subject of this promotional piece. 
A three-page article entitled "The Best Buys Come to Those Who Wait: Capitalize on customer wait time with 
strong lobby sales" in the April 2002 issue of Modem Car Care devotes only eight sentences to the beneficiary. 
Several other individuals are named in this article and they receive equal or greater attention. 
The petitioner submitted only the first page of an article entitled "Follow the Latest Trends in Vending: 
Operators are having success with non-traditional vending products" in the August 2002 issue of Modem Car 
Care. The incomplete portion of the article devotes less than ten sentences to the beneficiary. 
The petitioner submitted a portion of an article from the January 6,2003 issue of Convenience Store News. The 
incomplete portion of the article devotes only eight sentences to the beneficiary. Furthermore, the title and author 
of the article are not visible on the two pages that were provided. We also note that an advertisement for the 
beneficiary's company appears on the bottom of the second page. From the limited material presented, it is 
apparent that the beneficiary and his company were not the main subject of this article. 
A two-page article entitled "Freshen Up Sales: Air fresheners drive self-serve vending" in the February 2003 
issue of Modem Car Care devotes thirteen sentences to the beneficiary. Several other individuals are named in 
this article and they receive equal or greater attention. 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 5 
A two-page article entitled "Lobbying for Business: Are lobby sales right for your canvash?'in the April 2003 
issue of Modem Car Care devotes less than ten sentences to the beneficiary. Several other individuals are named 
in this article and they receive equal or greater attention. 
The plain wording of this criterion requires "published materials about the alien." If the beneficiary himself is not 
the primary subject of the preceding articles, then such articles fail to demonstrate his individual acclaim. 
Furthermore, the petitioner has not provided evidence regarding the volume of distribution of the preceding 
publications. Without quantitative data showing their significant national or international distribution, we cannot 
conclude that the preceding publications qualify as "major trade publications." 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted several letters of 'support, the majority of which are from individuals with whom the 
beneficiary has had a business relationship. 
An exception is the letter from Professor of Management and International Business at 
Pace University, who states: 
I am submitting this opinion in support of [the beneficiary's] application for an 0-1 visa, as an 
individual of outstanding and exceptional ability in the field of business. 
[The beneficiary's] company distributes what is basically a commodity product in one segment of the 
automotive industry - that is, accessories such as air fresheners for commercial vehicles. His clients are 
carwashes, gas stations, convenience stores and similar distribution points. 
What is interesting about the case is the evidence of [the beneficiary's] entrepreneurial skills and 
determination. A newcomer to the United States, beginning with no resources, [the beneficiary] built a 
remarkable business - now one of the top five firms in this specialty field - and won a fine reputation in 
the community at the same time. 
The letters of support for [the beneficiary's] petition as a businessman of outstanding and exceptional 
capacity all underline his business skills, which is to be expected, but also attest to his personal qualities 
as well - diligent, determined, and hard-working. To this I would add innovation. The materials I have 
reviewed strongly indicate a keen sense of marketing innovation and intelligence and an ability to 
redefine a product and introduce it into new markets. 
Dr. Blank does not state that he was aware of the beneficiary's standing in the business field prior to being 
requested to review the documentation supporting this petition. Dr. asserts that the beneficiary is a 
skilled businessman, but he does not specifically identify or address the beneficiary's "business-related 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 6 
contributions of major significance in the field." Nor does ~r.ate that the beneficiary is nationally or 
internationally acclaimed in the automotive accessory distribution industry. An opinion from an expert who 
was not previously aware of the alien, and is simply reviewing testimonials or a list of accomplishments, 
cannot establish national or international acclaim. Such a letter may, in fact, simply reinforce the conclusion 
that the alien is not well-known in the field, by demonstrating that the alien's reputation did not precede the 
specific request for a recommendation. An advisory opinion is required for a nonimmigrant 0-1 petition, but 
is not required in this proceeding. 
, Key Accounts Executive, Car-Freshner Corporation, states: 
[The beneficiary] has been a customer of Car-Freshner Corporation since the inception of his 
distributorship (well over 5 years). [The beneficiary] is a highly motivated and productive person. 
During the period that [the beneficiary] has been our customer, I have had the pleasure of seeing his 
company start from the beginning to a very successful operation today. This could not have been 
accomplished without a lot of hard work and dedication. 
National Sales Manager, Molded Products, Inc., states that she has known the 
beneficiary for five years as a business partner. She further states: 
[The beneficiary] is well known in this business. . . . He has built his company into one of the most 
successful businesses in our industry- is one of the top (5) companies in the United 
States in this specialty field, and this is all due to the hard work, talent and extraordinary business sense 
of [the beneficiary]. He is the company. He has clearly risen to the very top of his field. 
Inc., 
Associates, Inc. These individuals all state 
that they are business associates of the beneficiary or that they have worked with him on projects of "mutual 
benefit." Each of their letters includes the exact same observations as cited above in letter. It is 
not clear who is the actual author of their common statements, but it is highly improbable that all six of these 
individuals independently formulated the exact same wording. It is acknowledged that these individuals have 
lent their support to this petition, but it remains that at least six of them did not fully prepare their own 
observations. We further note that none of these letters specifically identify or discuss any of the 
beneficiary's original business contributions that have had a lasting or wide-ranging impact in the automotive 
accessory distribution industry. 
Many of the individuals offering letters of support state that Corp. is "one of the top (5) 
companies" in its specialty field. The record, however, includes no quantitative evidence to support their 
assertion. For example, the petitioner has not provided comparative sales revenue figures or market share 
data for Corporation in relation to the top companies in its industry. We cannot ignore the 
statute's demand for "extensive documentation" of sustained national or international acclaim. 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 7 
Aside from the advisory opinion letter from Dr.he remaining letters of support were all written by 
individuals who have had a business relationship with the beneficiary. With regard to the personal 
recommendation of individuals with direct ties to the beneficiary, the source of the recommendations is a 
highly relevant consideration. Such letters are not first-hand evidence that the beneficiary has earned 
sustained acclaim for his contributions beyond his professional contacts. If the beneficiary's reputation is 
primarily limited to his immediate business acquaintances, then he has not achieved national or international 
acclaim regardless of the expertise of his witnesses. An individual with sustained national or international 
acclaim should be able to produce ample unsolicited materials reflecting that acclaim. 
While the beneficiary has performed admirably as business owner and marketer of automobile accessories 
such as air fresheners, simply running a successful company does not rise to the level of contribution of major 
significance in business. The beneficiary engages in what is, inherently, a business endeavor involving yearly 
sales of perhaps a few million dollars. There is no quantitative evidence showing that the beneficiary's 
company enjoys a greater market share or has been significantly more successful at the national level or 
international level than other businesses that distribute automobile accessories. In conclusion, we find that 
the evidence presented in regard to this criterion is not adequate to support a finding that the beneficiary's 
work is nationally or internationally recognized throughout his industry as a major contribution. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the3eld, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted articles of which the beneficiary was the author such as "Go On, Be a Sell-Out!" 
(Modem Car Care, June 2000) and "R.R. Lalena Corporation" (Modem Car Care, December 2001). The latter 
article appeared under the heading "COMPANY PROFILE" and listed contact information for the beneficiary's 
company. It is unclear as to whether the company profile of-orporation appearing in the December 
2001 issue of Modem Car Care was a paid promotional advertisement. The petitioner submitted another 
company profile of corporation appearing on page 37 of the October 2002 issue of CSP 
Convenience Store / Petroleum. As noted previously, CSP identifies itself as a "SUPPLIER SOURCEBOOK," 
therefore it is rather likely that the beneficiary paid for his company's profile to be included in the CSP issue. The 
remaining articles from the April and August 2002 issues of Modem Car Care quote the beneficiary, but these 
articles were clearly authored by and Tracy Charuhas rather than the beneficiary. 
Therefore, the only substantive article submitted under this criterion is the one-page article in Modem Car Care 
entitled "Go On, Be a Sell-Out!" There is no evidence of the industry's reaction to this article, nor any indication 
that it was viewed as significantly influential. Furthermore, without quantitative data showing that Modem Car 
Care has significant national or international readership volume, we cannot conclude that it qualifies as a "major 
trade publication." 
Evidence that the alien has pelformed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
The record contains evidence indicating that the beneficiary serves in a leading role for his company, but the - - 
record lacks adequate documentation (such as comparative market share data or sales figures) showing th- 
joys a distinguished national or international reputation in its industry. The beneficiary, 
EAC 04 010 51841 
Page 8 
like any other company president, plays a significant role in directing the activities of his company. While the 
record portrays the beneficiary as starting and running a successful business operation, it does not establish 
that the beneficiary exhibits a degree of expertise that places him above most other company executives 
(including those who run publicly traded companies) at the national or international level. We find that the 
petitioner's evidence is not adequate to demonstrate that that the beneficiary has performed in a leading or critical 
role for a distinguished organization, or that his involvement has earned him sustained national or international 
acclaim. 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate that the 
alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim, is one of the small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor, and that the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. The petitioner in this case has failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary meets at 
least three of the criteria that must be satisfied to establish the sustained national or international acclaim 
necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Review of the record does not establish that the beneficiary has distinguished himself to such an extent that he 
may be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within the small percentage at 
the very top of his field. The evidence is not persuasive that the beneficiary's achievements set him significantly 
above almost all others in his field at the national or international level. Therefore, the petitioner has not 
established eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the petition may not be approved. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 
U.S.C. 9 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.