dismissed EB-1A Case: Carpet Weaving

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 4992300 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 16, 2020 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a[n] carpet weaving artist, seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A). This first 
preference classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their 
extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have 
been recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record established 
that the Petitioner had met one of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of which she must meet at least 
three. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability if: 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204 .5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten 
categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material 
in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record reflects that the Petitioner has been a professional carpet weaver in the field of Uzbek 
traditional carpet weaving since 2008. She seeks to continue her work in the field of Uzbek traditional 
carpet weaving in the United States. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that she has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, she must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director found that the Petitioner met one of the evidentiary criteria 
relating to the artistic display of her work. The record reflects that the Petitioner has displayed her 
rugs at several artistic exhibitions such as the 20171 I inl I New 
Mexico and the 20171 I Central Asia in I We therefore agree with the Director that 
she meets this criterion. The Director also concluded that the Petitioner did not meet the criteria 
pertaining to awards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i); membership at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii); published 
material at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii); original contributions at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v); and 
scholarly articles at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that she also meet these additional criteria and provides additional 
evidence. After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we find that the Petitioner has not 
established that she satisfies three of the criteria, as required. 
Documentation of the alien 's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the.field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) 
The Petitioner asserts that she meets this criterion through her receipt of the "international" 2016 
I I Prize for the Asia-Pacific region. In determining that the Petitioner did not meet this 
criterion, the Director noted that the record includes a copy of the award, but the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate how the award "constitutes a nationally or internationally recognized award for 
excellence in the field of carpet weaving." 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the "extensive additional information" provided in her response 
to the Director's request for evidence (RFE) established that this award is internationally recognized 
for excellence in her field of endeavor. She submits a document from thel I 
2 
titled "Complete 2016 Application Kit for theOAward of Excellence for Handicrafts" 1 containing 
the criteria for the award. She also rovides a letter of recommendation from a 
cultural expert at.__ __________________________ .,....in 
'----~ 
in which he states, "this award constitutes an internationally recognized award in the field of folk 
handicraft," in the case of the Petitioner of "carpet weaving." 
Here the evidence in the record is insufficient to establish that the Petitioner meets this criterion. 
Specifically, the I !correspondence and website printouts provided with her RFE response 
generally describe the organization, its function, and the guidelines for membership, but do not 
mention the award itself In addition, these documents do not include information such as the award 
criterion, its national or international significance, or number of recipients, which might establish that 
the award is nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field, as required. 
We note that the award's application kit submitted by the Petitioner on appeal identifies four criteria 
for the receipt of this award. One of these requires that the recipient's product demonstrate "excellence 
and standard-setting quality in craftsmanship" as determined by "the use of high quality materials, a 
high standard of technique and special attention to manufacturing and finishing details." While this 
is sufficient to establish that the award is granted for excellence in the Petitioner's fitµd.ilf,endeavor, 
the document lacks information, such as the number of these awards granted by thel__J to carpet 
weavers and other artisans, which might show the award to be nationally or internationally recognized 
for excellence in the Petitioner's field of endeavor. 2 
The Petitioner also provides I h letter of recommendation containing language mirroring 
both the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(h) and the award application materials. However, other than 
naming himself and another expert as the judges involved in the issuance of this award, his letter does 
not provide additional information about the award' s recognition. Therefore,! ts conclusory 
statement is insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner meets this criterion. See 1756, Inc. v. United 
States Att'y Gen., 745 F. Supp. 9, 17 (D.D.C. 1990) (noting that we need not accept primarily 
conclusory statements). 
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not established that she satisfies this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
class[fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or .fields. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) 
The Petitioner asserts that she meets this criterion thn:ugh her mejhership inl JI the Uzbek 
Association of Artisans, Craftsmen, and Folk Artists I . The record includes three letters 
from.__ ______ ___,, I Is chief executive officer (CEO) and one froml I 
1 The A lication Kit ex lains that this c=]award was established in 2001 by the.__ ___________ ~ 
~--...----=----.----"' and that 'c=J since 2014 is continuing the programme under the patronage of 
~-~within Asia Pacific Region." 
2 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form 1-140 Petitions: 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADJ 1-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https: / /www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/P o licyManual.html. 
3 
chairman of the I !Regional Department ofl I in support of the Petitioner's claim. 
Both I _ and .... l _____ __.I state that the Petitioner is a "current and foll member of the 
Association" and that it "requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by nationally 
or internationally recognized experts in the respective field of folk art," in the Petitioner's case, 
"traditional Uzbek carpet weaving." In another letter,I I indicates"[ a ]s per the Charter 
of I I Association, admission to the Association is allowed dependent on the suggestion of 
Art Experts Council," but the Petitioner does not provide the association's charter or other evidence 
that might corroborate this statement or otherwise provide information on the Art Experts Council. 
Thus, while the letters froml I and I I contain language that mirrors the 
regulation, neither those authors nor the Petitioner has pointed to sufficient evidence in the record that 
supports the claim that the organization requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged 
by recognized national or international experts. Without additional evidence that accurately and 
credibly explains the association's membership requirements or selection process, conclusory 
statements are insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner meets this criterion. See 17 5 6, Inc. v. 
United States Atty Gen., 745 F. Supp. 9, 17 (D.D.C. 1990). 
~e in addition that I l's letter provides that~-------~ andD 
L___J whom he identifies as experts in the field and members of the association's aforementioned 
"Art Experts Council," recommended the Petitioner's membership. However, he does not explain 
the basis of his knowledge, and neither he nor the Petitioner have offered sufficient evidence in support 
of this statement or otherwise demonstrating that members of the Art Experts Council are recognized 
as national or international experts in the field of carpet weaving. As we note above, conclusory 
statements are not sufficient to demonstrate the Petitioner meets this criterion, absent additional 
evidence. 
For these reasons, the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner satisfies this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is sought 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) 
The record includes a properly translated article about the Petitioner titled '.__ ________ ___. 
published in Bukhoroi Oqshomi, including the title, date, and author as well as a letter describing the 
article and confirming its publication in Number 47(11125). However, the Petitioner does not provide 
print circulation statistics or other appropriate evidence for Bukhoroi Oqshomi establishing that its 
circulation is high relative to that of other newspapers, or otherwise demonstrating that the newspaper 
rises to the level of major media. 3 She therefore has not shown that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scient[fic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sign[ficance in the field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v) 
3 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005 .1, supra at 7 (noting that evidence of published material about the alien 
in major media should establish that the circulation ( on-line or in print) is high compared to other circulation statistics.). 
4 
In order to satisfy the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), the Petitioner must establish that not 
only has she made original contributions but that they has been of major significance in the field. For 
example, a petitioner may show that the contributions have been widely implemented throughout the 
field, have remarkably impacted or influenced the field, or have otherwise risen to a level of major 
significance in the field. 
Here the Petitioner maintains that her "mastery of Uzbek carpet weaving techniques" and her 
adaptation of them "to contemporary materials and tastes" constitute an original contribution to the 
field. She argues farther that her skills have been "recognized as a contribution of ma·or si nificance 
to the field by leading experts in this field." She submits an additional letter fro.r=m~------r--------
as well as recommendation letters from .__ _______ _.ofL...-__ ,---..._-------;and 
[ I of the Academy of Arts of Uzbekistan (AAU), and.__ ______ ___. and 
7 I of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). 5 
While these letters indicate that the Petitioner is an expert carpet weaver, they do not support a finding 
that the Petitioner has made original contributions in the field, as she asserts. Specifically, the 
correspondence does not identify her original contributions in the field of carpet weaving or provide 
specific examples of how her work has been of major significance. 6 For example,! I 
states, "[the Petitioner] is an accomplished carpet weaver who has made a contribution of major 
significance in this field," but does not offer specific examples.I I similarly notes, "[the 
Petitioner] is exceptionally capable" and that the "uncommon nature of [the Petitioner's] work 
separates her from other skilled workers," but does not identify any original contributions made by the 
Petitioner in her field of endeavor. FinallyJ I notes that during the Petitioner's patcipatiln 
at an unidentified art show she "showed her ability of using appropriate patterns in weavin ." 
Letters that specifically articulate how the alien's contributions are of major significance to the field 
and its impact on subsequent work add value. Letters that lack specifics and make broad, unsupported 
assertions do not add value, and are not considered to be probative evidence that may form the basis 
for meeting this criterion. 7 The record lacks other evidence corroborating the Petitioner's assertions 
that her mastery and adaptation of Uzbek carpet weaving techniques are original contributions or that 
these techniques are of major significance in the field of carpet weaving. She therefore has not 
established that she meets this criterion. 
As discussed above, we find that the Petitioner does not satisfy the three criteria relating to awards, 
published material, or membership. Although on appeal the Petitioner also claims that she meets the 
criteria related to scholarly articles, we need not reach this issue. We reserve it as the Petitioner cannot 
meet the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally 
required to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach); see also Matter of L­
A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an 
applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
41 _ Is letter indicates that he isl I of this council. .---------, I l 
5 Ibe record also includes letters Jom I I providing references for I I llnd._ ___ _,, and from 
I of the AAU, describing this entity. We have reviewed this correspondence but do not 
discuss it here. 
6 While we discuss only a sampling of this correspondence here, we have reviewed all of the letters in their entirety. 
7 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005 .1, supra, at 9. 
5 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, we need not provide the type of final 
merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise that we 
have reviewed the record in the aggregate, concluding that it does not support a finding that the 
Petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held 
that even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of her work is indicative of the required sustained national or 
international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )(l)(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in the field, and she is one of the small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her eligibility as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6