dismissed
EB-1A
dismissed EB-1A Case: Embroidery Design
Decision Summary
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to meet the evidentiary standards for any of the claimed criteria. The petitioner did not prove that her award was nationally recognized, that her membership required outstanding achievement, or that her articles were published and significant. Consequently, she failed to establish the sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
Criteria Discussed
Prizes Or Awards Membership In Associations Authorship Of Scholarly Articles
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W.. Rm. A3042 Washington, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: / ; ,. - SRC 04 250 52187 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 4- 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. 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. 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. $ 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 she has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. This petition, filed on September 24, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as a "Silk Embroidered Bag Designer and Maker." In support of the petition, the petitioner submitted fourteen photographs of what are alleged to be her creations. 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 October 22, 2004, the director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner's evidence did not satisfy any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(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. On appeal, the petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationallj~ or internationally recognizedprizes or awards,for excellence in the field of endeavor. The petitioner submits a Certificate of Honor (dated August 1998) with an accompanying English language translation indicating that she "was granted the first-class award of National design contest." The record, however, contains no evidence of publicity surrounding this contest or evidence showing that her 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 artistic award. Furthermore, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(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. Documentation of the alien's membership in associatioizs in the field for which classzfication 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 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. The petitioner submits an identity card allegedly issued by the Institute. The record, however, does not include the membership bylaws or ofticia1 admission requirements for this organization. There is no evidence showing that admission to membership in this organization required outstanding achievement or that the petitioner was evaluated by national or international experts in consideration of her admission to membership. Evidence ofthe alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media. The petitioner submits evidence of her alleged authorship of articles in Chinese Embroidery and The Art of Traditional Embroidery. The record, however, contains no evidence showing that these articles were actually published under the petitioner's name or evidence of their significant national or international distribution. Nor is there supporting evidence showing that the petitioner's articles are viewed throughout her field as significantly influential. The petitioner also re-submits what are alleged to be photos of her "silk embroidery bags," but these photos do not satisfy any of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. ยง 204.5(h)(3). In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she 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 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 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. 5 204.5(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. 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, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), afd. 345 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Dou 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. 5 1361. Here, that burden has not been met. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.