dismissed EB-1A

dismissed EB-1A Case: Fence Installer

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Individual ๐Ÿ“‚ Fence Installer

Decision Summary

The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to provide any evidence to establish eligibility. The initial petition contained no supporting documents, and the petitioner did not respond to a notice of intent to deny. The only evidence submitted on appeal, a letter from his employer, did not address any of the regulatory criteria or demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.

Criteria Discussed

Receipt Of Lesser Nationally Or Internationally Recognized Prizes Or Awards Membership In Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievements Published Material About The Alien Participation As A Judge Of The Work Of Others Original Contributions Of Major Significance Authorship Of Scholarly Articles Display Of Work At Artistic Exhibitions Or Showcases Leading Or Critical Role For Distinguished Organizations High Salary Or Other High Remuneration Commercial Successes In The Performing Arts

Sign up free to download the original PDF

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 
EAC 05 242 50559 
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. ยง 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. 
b Robert P. ~iemain, 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 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. 8 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. 
3 204.5(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): 
Initial evidence: 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. Such evidence shall include evidence of a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, international recognized award), or at least three of the following: 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor; 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classification is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or fields; 
(iii) Published materials 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. Such evidence shall 
include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation; 
(iv) 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 allied field of specification for which classification is sought; 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field; 
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media; 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases; 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation; 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration 
for services, in relation to others in the field; or 
(x) Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
This petition, filed on September 1, 2005, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a fence installer. The record reflects that the petitioner has been residing in the United States since July 4, 
2001. Given the length of time between the petitioner's arrival in the United States and the petition's filing 
date (more than four years), it is reasonable to expect him to have earned national acclaim in the United States 
during that time. The petitioner has had ample time to establish a reputation in this country. 
The petition was unaccompanied by supporting evidence. On September 30, 2005, the director issued a 
notice of intent to deny informing the petitioner of the deficiencies in the record and requesting evidence 
pertaining to the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3). 
The petitioner did not respond to the director's notice of intent to deny. Therefore, on February 9, 2006, the 
director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner had not established eligibility pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
On appeal, the petitioner states: "Currently, I am employed as a fence installer, in which I have been working 
for 3 years. I am also enclosing a letter and records from the company in which I am employed. This 
information is the only proof I am able to provide you." 
Page 4 
The petitioner submits a letter from his current employer, ut this letter does not address 
the petitioner's eligibility under any of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3). Nor does this letter 
demonstrate that the petitioner has earned sustained acclaim at the national or international level. 
In this case, the petitioner has 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 national or international 
acclaim necessary to qualifL 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. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. 3 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

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.