dismissed EB-1A Case: Chef

identifying data dsletsd to 
prev-*y un-ted 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
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. $ 1 153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
SCj&crbert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
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 (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification 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. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established 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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have 
consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals seeking immigrant 
visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-9 (November 29, 1991). 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 or her 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 he has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on December 22, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary 
ability as a chef. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
 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. 
Page 3 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted two award certificates issued by the 
Fuzhou City Cooks Association stating that he won the first prize at the 1998 and 2000 "City Cooking Art 
Competition." These awards reflect local recognition rather than national or international recognition. 
The petitioner also submitted a 4 inch by 6 inch color photograph of an "Award Cup" which the petitioner 
identifies as "the First Prize of 'Min Hua' Cup Cooking Competition." The petitioner's response also 
included three larger photocopied images of what appear to be the same Award cup.' The record includes no 
information regarding the scope of this competition or the significance of this award. Further, pursuant to 
8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3), any document containing foreign language submitted to CIS shall be accompanied by 
a full English language translation that 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 
English language translation of the Chinese inscription appearing on the Award Cup was not certified as 
required by the regulation. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a "Certificate of Award" stating that he won first prize at the "Seventh 
Chinese-Japanese New Cooks Craftsmanship Competition" in 2002. The record includes no information 
regarding the scope of this competition or the significance of this award. 
In regard to the preceding first prize awards won by the petitioner, there is no evidence of contemporaneous 
publicity surrounding these awards or evidence showing that they command a substantial level of recognition. 
Further, the record includes no evidence that would demonstrate the number of recipients, the criteria for 
granting the awards, the level of expertise of those considered, and the number of individuals eligible to 
compete. We note here that section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act requires extensive documentation of sustained 
national or international acclaim. Pursuant to the statute, the petitioner must provide adequate evidence 
showing that the awards presented under this criterion enjoy significant national or international stature. In 
this case, there is no supporting documentation from the awarding entities or print media to establish that the 
petitioner's awards are nationally or internationally recognized. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classijication 
is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
In order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion, the petitioner must show that 
the association requires outstanding achievement as an essential condition for admission to membership. 
Membership requirements based on employment or activity in a given field, minimum education or 
experience, standardized test scores, grade point average, recommendations by colleagues or current 
Unlike the color photograph, the photocopied images were not accompanied by a written explanation identifying the 
name of the prize shown. 
Page 4 
members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion as such requirements do not constitute outstanding 
achievements. In addition, it is clear from the regulatory language that members must be selected at the 
national or international level, rather than the local or regional level. Therefore, membership in an association 
that evaluates its membership applications at the local or regional chapter level would not qualify. Finally, 
the overall prestige of a given association is not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements 
rather than the association's overall reputation. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted his "Employment Qualifications 
Certificate" issued to him by the "Fuzhou City Labor and Social Security Bureau" in August 1999 for passing a 
standardized examination for a level one Chinese Cook. We do not find, however, that a earning an Employment 
Qualifications Certificate issued by a local government is tantamount to membership in an association requiring 
outstanding achievement. There is no evidence demonstrating that obtaining this credential required 
outstanding achievement in the culinary arts or that the petitioner was evaluated by national or international 
experts in order to receive his credential. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a photocopy of what is alleged to be 
the front and back cover of his book entitled Original Pot-Stewed Fowl. The record, however, includes no 
evidence of circulation data for this book including the geographic areas where the publication was available 
and the number of copies sold. Without evidence showing that this book had substantial national or 
international readership, we cannot conclude that it qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or 
other major media. Nor is there evidence showing that this book received favorable critical reviews or praise 
from recognized experts in the greater culinary community. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he 
meets this criterion. 
In this case, we concur with the director's finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate his receipt of a 
major internationally recognized award, or that he meets at least three of the criteria that must be satisfied to 
establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner 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 petitioner'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. 
Beyond the decision of the director, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(5) requires "clear evidence that the 
alien is coming to the United States to continue work in the area of expertise. Such evidence may include 
letter(s) from prospective employer(s), evidence of prearranged commitments such as contracts, or a 
statement from the beneficiary detailing plans on how he or she intends to continue his or her work in the 
United States." The record includes no such evidence. 
- 
Page 5 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial decision. See 
Spencer Enterprises, Znc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), afd. 345 F.3d 683 
(9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the AAO reviews 
appeals on a de novo basis). 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit 
sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. fj 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.