dismissed EB-1A Case: Fashion Design

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
~dent@dng data daeQd b U. S. Citizenship 
meksrll- and Immigration 
in~ofposlload~ J&-* 
3 
DI]BLIC COPY 
FILE: - Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 6 2005 
EAC 05 092 5 1339 
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. 9 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. 
s~obert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
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. 
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 February 7, 2005, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a fashion designer. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(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. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in thefield of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted a certificate stating that she received a "silver prize in the year 2000 World Chinese 
Exhibition" for her "Star of Dinner" design. The record, however, includes no evidence of publicity 
surrounding this prize or evidence showing that it enjoys a significant level of recognition. In order to satisfy 
this criterion, the petitioner must provide evidence showing that her prize enjoys significant national or 
international stature.' In this case, the record contains no documentation from the awarding entity or the print 
media to establish that the petitioner's prize is a nationally or internationally recognized award for fashion 
excellence. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits an unsigned, non-certified document entitled "Agenda of the World Chinese 
Art Exhibition" allegedly issued by the "Culture Department of China, Culture & Art & Talented Center, 
Chinese Literature & Art Alliance, Art Guidance Committee, Year 2000 The World Chinese Art Exhibition 
Committee." This document (issued in the English language) does not include an address, phone number or 
any other information regarding how this organization may be contacted. Furthermore, the document has 
numerous grammatical errors. In light of these multiple deficiencies, we do not accept this document as being 
authentic. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classij?cation is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines orfields. 
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 submitted an English language document entitled "VENEZUENA [sic] FASHION 
DESIGNER certifying that she is a "MEMBER OF THE VENEZUENA [sic] CASABLANCA FASHION 
GROUP." This document is allegedly signed by an individual named "Richard Griffman" (whose relevance 
to the fashion industry has not been explained). Aside from the two misspellings of "Venezuela," Richard 
Griffman's letter does not include an address, phone number or any other information regarding how he may 
I Large-scale competitions typically issue event programs listing the various competitive categories and the names of the 
individual participants. At a competition's conclusion, results are usually provided indicating how each participant 
performed in relation to the other competitors in his or her category. The petitioner, however, has provided no evidence 
of the official comprehensive results for the World Chinese Art Exhibition. 
Page 4 
be contacted. In light of these deficiencies, we do not accept his letter as being authentic. It is incumbent 
upon the petitioner to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence. Any 
attempt to explain or reconcile such inconsistencies will not suffice unless the petitioner submits competent 
objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582,591-92 (BIA 1988). 
Even if we were to accept the authenticity of the document bearing Richard Griffman's signature (which we 
do not), the record includes no evidence of the bylaws or the official admission requirements for the 
"Venezuena [sic] Casablanca Fashion Group." There is no evidence showing that this organization requires 
outstanding achievement in the fashion industry or that individuals are evaluated by national or international 
experts in consideration of their admission to membership. 
Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of 
others in the same or an alliedfield of specification for which class$cation is sought. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3) provides that "a petition for an alien of extraordinary ability must be 
accompanied by evidence that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her 
achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Evidence of the petitioner's participation as a 
judge must be evaluated in terms of these requirements. For example, serving as a judge for a national 
competition involving professionals is of far greater probative value than serving as a judge for a local 
competition involving amateurs. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits what is alleged to be a "Certificate of Engagement" issued by "The China 
International Fashion Research Committee" stating that the petitioner "is engaged as advanced judge 
advisor." We note that the translation accompanying this certificate was not certified as required by the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(b)(3). Further, the plain wording of this criterion requires "[elvidence of the 
alien's participation . . . as a judge of the work of others." In this instance, there is no evidence of the 
petitioner's activities as a judge for 'The China International Fashion Research Committee." For example, the 
record lacks information regarding the nature of the petitioner's duties in this capacity, the fashion events at 
which she served as a judge, the names of individuals she evaluated, and their level of expertise. We cannot 
ignore that the statute and regulations require "extensive documentation7' of sustained national or international 
acclaim. Without evidence showing that the petitioner's activities involved evaluating professional designers 
at the national or international level, we cannot conclude she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the$eld at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner submits various photographs of what are alleged to be her fashion designs, but the specific 
venues and dates of display have not been identified. In fact, there is no evidence (such as an event program 
or fashion exhibition brochure) confirming the petitioner's involvement in any fashion exhibition or showcase 
in China, Venezuela, or the U.S. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient 
for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 
(Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
It must be stressed that a fashion designer does not satisfy this criterion simply by arranging for his or her 
apparel to be displayed or sold. In this case, the petitioner has not submitted evidence demonstrating that her 
designs have been displayed at significant national venues. Nor is there any indication that the petitioner's 
apparel has been featured along side that of fashion designers who enjoy national or international reputations. 
Furthermore, the petitioner has not demonstrated her regular participation in shows or exhibitions at exclusive 
venues devoted largely to the display of her fashion designs alone. The evidence presented by the petitioner 
is not sufficient to show that her exhibitions enjoy a national reputation or that participation in her exhibitions 
was a privilege extended to only top national or international fashion designers. 
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. 
Beyond the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3), the petitioner submitted letters of support allegedly 
issued by the Venezuela Textile Design Association and the Venezuela Casablanca Fashion Group. These letters 
did not include an address, phone number, or any other information regarding how these organizations may be 
contacted. Such letters are not adequate to demonstrate the petitioner's sustained national or international 
acclaim in the fashion industry. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself as a fashion designer 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. 9 204.5(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 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. 3 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.