dismissed EB-1A Case: Chinese Lantern Design

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: SEP 2 8 2005 
SRC 05 003 51055 
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: 
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. 
u G Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office 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. Q 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 Ablility. -- 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 or her field of expertise are set forth in the regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that 
the petitioner must show that she has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on October 5, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as 
a Chinese lantern designer and maker. In support of the petition, the petitioner submitted twelve photographs 
of what are alleged to be her Chinese lanterns. This evidence, however, was not sufficient to demonstrate the 
petitioner's sustained national or international acclaim, or that her achievements have been recognized in her 
field of expertise. On November 3, 2004, the director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner's 
evidence did not satisfy any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. Q 204.5(h)(3). 
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 
Page 3. 
must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. On appeal, the petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submits a Certificate of Honor (dated December 1997) with an accompanying English language 
translation indicating that she received a "First Class Award of National Grand Design Contest." The record, 
however, contains no evidence of publicity surrounding this contest or evidence showing that the petitioner's 
award enjoys a significant level of recognition. Simply receiving an award certificate with the word 
"national" in the title does not satisfy this very restrictive criterion. The petitioner must provide evidence 
showing that her award enjoys significant national or international stature. In this case, the record contains no 
documentation from the awarding entity or print media to establish that the petitioner's Certificate of Honor is 
a nationally recognized award. Furthermore, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), any document containing 
foreign language submitted to Citizenship and Immigration Services (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 translation 
accompanying the petitioner's Certificate of Honor was not certified as required by the regulation. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signflcantly high remuneration 
for services, in relation to others in the field. 
The petitioner re-submits the same twelve photographs of what are alleged to be her Chinese lanterns. On 
appeal, the petitioner has listed a dollar amount under each of these photographs. The record contains no 
evidence showing that the petitioner actually earned the dollar amounts appearing under the photographs. 
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)). There is no evidence showing that 
the petitioner's compensation is significantly higher than that of other lantern designers. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofice receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
The petitioner claims that the twelve photographs of what are alleged to be her Chinese lanterns are evidence of 
her "commercial successes." The plain wording of this criterion, however, indicates that it is intended for 
"performing" artists such as musicians and actresses rather than the petitioner's occupation. Nevertheless, the 
regulation calls for commercial success in the form of "sales7' or "receipts"; simply submitting alleged 
photographs of one's work cannot satisfy criterion. The record contains no evidence of documented "sales" or 
"receipts" showing significant national distribution of the petitioner's products or their widespread 
commercial success. 
In this case, we concur with the director's finding that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she meets at 
least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner 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 petitioner's achievements set her significantly above 
almost all others in her field at a 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. § 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 contains no such evidence. 
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. 5 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.