dismissed EB-1A Case: Fencing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-F-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: AUG. 8, 2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an epee fencer and fencing coach, seeks classification as an individual of 
extraordinary ability in athletics. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A). This first preference classification makes immigrant visas 
available to those who can demonstrate their extraordinary ability through sustained national or 
international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in their field through extensive 
documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Petitioner had demonstrated a one-time achievement or satisfied at 
least three of the ten regulatory criteria. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that she submitted the requisite initial evidence. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) ofthe Act describes qualified immigrants for this classification as follows: 
(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 m the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
.
Matter of A-F-
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth two options for satisfying this classification's initial evidence 
requirements. First, a petitioner can demonstrate a one-time achievement that is a major, 
internationally recognized award. Alternatively, he or she must pr_ovide documentation that meets at 
least three of the ten categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) (including items such as 
awards, published material in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 201 0). 1 
This two-step analysis is consistent with our holding that the "truth is to be determined not by the 
quantity of evidence alone but by its quality," as well as the principle that we examine "each piece of 
evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of 
the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true." Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is an epee fencer who has won junior (ages 17 to 19) world championships and 
competed on Israel's national senior team at the world championships in (when she 
was 17 years old or younger). She subsequently became a 
1 champion while she was a student at the 
1. She has also coached other fencers at and The Director 
concluded that she had not demonstrated a one-time achievement or satisfied any of the regulatory 
criteria.2 On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that her first place finish at the 
constitutes a one-time achievement and, regardless, she has satisfied four of the ten criteria. For the 
reasons discussed below, we find that she has met two criteria: she won lesser nationally and 
internationally recognized awards and served as a member of an association that requires 
outstanding achievements of its members. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii). She has not, however, 
submitted the required initial evidence to meet any additional criteria. 
A. One-time Achievement 
Congress' example of a one-time achievement is a Nobel Prize. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 
19, 1990). The regulation is consistent with this legislative history, stating that a one-time 
achievement must be a major, internationally recognized award. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
1 
This case discusses a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the required 
number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination .. See also Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 
126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 20 13); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.O. Wash. 20 II). 
2 The Director focused on the evidence as it relates to coaching as that is what the Petitioner intends to do in the United 
States. We note that the first question is whether she has demonstrated extraordinary ability in athletics. Section 
203(b )(I )(A)(i) of the Act. Had she done so, we would separately consider whether she intends to continue competing 
and if coaching falls within her area of expertise. Section 203(b )(I )(A)(ii) of the Act. 
2 
.
Matter ofA-F-
Significantly, even a lesser internationally recognized award could serve to meet only one of the ten 
regulatory criteria, of which a petitioner must meet at least three. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The 
selection of Nobel Laureates, Congress' example, is reported in the top media internationally 
regardless of the nationality of the awardees, is a familiar name to the public at large, and includes a 
larg~ cash prize. While an internationally recognized award could conceivably constitute a one-time 
achievement without meeting all of those elements, it is clear from the example Congress provided 
that the award must be internationally recognized in the individual's field as one of the top awards. 
In . the Petitioner won a gold medal at the She provided information about 
the games from the and a blog on the _ 
website. The information from these sources confirms that the games represent a quadrennial 
held in Israel. The and the 
sanction these games. The _ states that while all events are 
competitive, some "measure up to world-class competition." According to materials from the 
that the Petitioner submitted, the games in had athletes, of 
whom were from abroad. The record corroborates that Olympic medalists and world champions, 
including swimmer Mark Spitz, have competed at these games. 
Fencing is an Olympic sport and the record is insufficient to confirm that the fencing 
medals are major, internationally recognized awards. The fact that internationally renowned athletes 
have competed at these games is not determinative. The Petitioner has not documented significant 
media coverage of those events outside oflsrael. Notably, the article' 
in states that was happy to win a "even if it's just a ., 
Without additional corroboration, she has not demonstrated that her medal 
constitutes a one-time achievement and she must therefore satisfy at least three of the ten regulatory 
criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). We analyze below those criteria the Petitioner has 
addressed in this proceeding. 
B. Regulatory Criteria 
Documentation of the alien 's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i). 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner's awards were local or regional and impermissibly age-
limited. The record does not support this conclusion. In 
addition to the discussed 
above, she is a champion, won a medal at the and a 
medal at the both junior events. While 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the are a major, internationally 
recognized competition, the record confirms that they are recognized nationally in Israel. In 
addition, an award or prize in a competition that is age-limited may still qualify provided it is 
3 
.
Matter of A-F-
nationally or internationally recognized.3 Although the junior events are age-limited, we must 
consider all the categories and their recognition in the field. Documents in the record show that 
junior competitors must be under 20 years old, another level, cadet, exists for fencers under age 17. 
Moreover, at issue for this criterion is solely whether the awards are nationally or internationally 
recognized. Notably, the junior competitions receive media coverage. For example, Maariv, an 
Israeli newspaper, covered the junior championships in Spain. In addition, while events are 
limited to college students, we are persuaded that recognition of its national championship is not 
limited to a single university or region. Therefore, the Petitioner has satisfied this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for ~which classtfication is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members. as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines or.fields. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
The Director acknowledged that the Petitioner competed at world championships while on the Israeli 
senior national team but only addressed her membership in head coach 
of the Team, confirms that the Petitioner was a member of that nation's 
senior women's team, which is also corroborated by her information on the screenshot from 
www.eurofencing in the record. We are persuaded that official national teams that select an 
exclusive group of athletes to compete at significant international events are qualifying associations. 
Thus, the Petitioner has also satisfied this criterion. 
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 classtfication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
The Director concluded that the material from website, a fencing website, and the 
regional Israeli newspaper did not appear in major media. The Director also declined to 
afford weight to information about the Israeli publication from Wikipedia. On appeal, the 
Petitioner references "numerous" articles reporting her success and asserts that they need not be 
"solely" about her. She does not address the Director's finding that Wikipedia is insufficient to 
establish is major media. 
The record does not contain the required initial evidence to show that the Israeli articles satisfy this 
criterion. The Petitioner offered numerous articles in Israeli newspapers with the initial filing. This 
submission, however, did not include certified translations and the name of each publication was 
either handwritten on the exhibit or not identified. In response to the Director's request for certified 
translations and information about the publications, the Petitioner supplied two ce1tified translations 
and information about from Wikipedia. She must provide certified translations for all 
3 
The question of whether an age-limited award or prize is indicative of a petitioner's sustained national or international 
acclaim or that individual's status as being among the small percentage at the very top of the field should be addressed in 
the final merits determination. 
4 
.
Matter of A-F-
foreign language documentation that she wants us to review. 8 C.F.R. § 1 03.2(b)(3). Accordingly, 
we will only consider the two Israeli articles that are supported by such translations. 
One article appeared in media with an unspecified level of distribution; the other is not about the 
Petitioner and the nature of that publication is insufficiently documented. The atiicle by 
is about the Petitioner. It appears in tre newspaper however, and the record does not 
contain corroborated information pertaining to the distribution or circulation of this publication. 
Accordingly, she has not established that it constitutes major media. The second article," 
" appeared in In 
some situations, an article may be considered to be "about" an individual even if it is not solely 
about that individual. The article with a qualifying translation that appeared in however, is 
not about the Petitioner. It is about the fencing results at the She is 
mentioned as a member of the women's epee team, but the article discusses the results in several 
other events, including the men's competitions. Thus, even if we accepted the Wikipedia
4 
information about being a national publication, the article is not about the Petitioner and, 
thus, cannot serve to meet this criterion. Similarly, the materials from the English language 
website are not about the Petitioner; rather, they mention her in the context of reporting the results of 
multiple events or about her father's work as a fencing coach. 
On appeal, the Petitioner does not address the statistical information appearing on fencing websites 
or the articles that were in publications, which we find do not satisfy this criterion. She 
has not shown that her rankings and finishes on website and are the type of 
authored and dated published material contemplated by this criterion. In addition, she has not 
demonstrated that the website and publications constitute major media, with a readership 
significantly above students, staff, and alumni of Accordingly, these filings do not 
satisfy this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic. or business-related 
contributions of major significance in thefield. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
The Director concluded that the awards presented under the awards criterion, 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i), could not serve to also meet this criterion and that the letters and evidence of the 
accomplishments by the Petitioner's students were insufficient. On appeal, she continues to rely on 
her awards and the accomplishments ofher students. These materials do not satisfy this criterion. 
Athletic awards and team memberships do not serve to meet this criterion. We have addressed the 
Petitioner's medals and participation on the Israeli national team above. While evidence may relate 
4 With regard to information from Wikipedia, there are no assurances about the reliability of the content from this open, 
user-edited internet site. See Badasa v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 2008). Keeping in mind Wikipedia's 
limitations, our consideration of material from this source will vary depending on whether an entry's relevant 
information is corroborated, as well as the purpose for which it is presented. As with any submission, we must evaluate 
the probative value and credibility ofthe documents provided. See Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. at 376. 
5 
.
Matter of A-F-
to more than one criterion, in the case of awards and team memberships, those accomplishments are 
specifically covered under the criteria at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) and (ii), which we find that the 
Petitioner meets. Successfully competing, however, is not also original and a contribution of major 
significance to a sport. Accordingly, we will not consider the Petitioner's own awards and team 
memberships under this criterion. 
The Petitioner documented success as a coach, but successfully training junior fencers is not an 
original contribution of major significance to the sport of fencing. executive 
director of affirms that while serving as a Camp Coach in 
and __, the Petitioner coached some of the best junior athletes in the country. As the 
Director noted, Mr. did not name the athletes. In addition, he does not confirm that they 
were primarily under the Petitioner's tutelage or, if they were, how they fared during that time. 
president of addresses several fencers the Petitioner 
coached. For example, he asserts that she began coaching in helping her 
attain a medal in the and become a member of the 
Ms. father, states that she took lessons 
from the Petitioner five to six times per week, two to three hours per day. An article entitled 
however, quotes Ms. high 
school coach, and does not suggest that she was ever primarily under the Petitioner's 
tutelage. The article mentions her fencing achievements at school and that she attends open bouting 
sessions at clubs. It does not suggest that she was training under other fencers at an. outside club. 
While Ms. has accomplishments at the these 
were not done when she was primarily under the Petitioner's tutelage. Mr. and 
mother of fencing student describe his progression from being unrated to 
obtaining a B rating (A is the highest). The record contains similar information relating to other 
young fencers the Petitioner has coached. This evidence reflects that she is a successful coach 
whose students have progressed under her mentorship. Such accomplishments, however, are not 
original and do not constitute a contribution of major significance to the field of coaching fencing as 
a whole. For all of the reasons discussed above the Petitioner has not satisfied this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner is not eligible because she has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a 
one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). Thus, we need not fully address the totality of the materials in a final merits 
determination. Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we have reviewed the record in the 
aggregate, concluding that it does not supports a finding that the Petitioner has established the level 
of expertise required for the classification sought. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of A-F-, ID# 454150 (AAO Aug. 8, 2017) 
6