dismissed EB-1A Case: Hair Styling

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave.. N.W.. Rm. A3042 - 
Washington, DC 20529 
pmeat clearly unv. _. ,, 
afwperso~al privamw 6 U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: - Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: WR 1 2 2005 
- 
EAC 04 098 51036 
IN RE: 
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: 
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. 
II 
$- Robert 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 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. 3 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim 
requisite to classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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 into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
The applicable regulation defines the statutory term "extraordinary ability" as "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). Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained 
national or international acclaim" that the statute requires. 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3). An alien can establish 
sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a "one-time achievement (that is, a major, 
international recognized award)." Id. Absent such an award, an alien can establish the necessary sustained 
acclaim by meeting at least three of ten other regulatory criteria. Id. 
In this case, the petitioner is a hair stylist who claims to be an "alien with extraordinary ability" presumably 
(though never stated) in the arts. The petitioner submitted evidence of numerous awards earned while he was a 
hair stylist in Argentina, two reference letters and three letters attesting to his work in Argentinean television 
and film. On appeal, the petitioner submits one additional letter and an article about the petitioner published in a 
Spanish newspaper on June 4, 2004. Because this article was published four months after the filing of the 
petition, it will not be considered. A petitioner must establish eligibility as of the date of filing. Matter of 
Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45,49 (Cornm. 1971). The remaining evidence and counsel's contentions are addressed 
in the following discussion of the regulatory criteria relevant to the petitioner's case. 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for 
excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The director correctly determined that the petitioner's hair styling awards earned in South America were 
insufficient to meet this criterion. A letter from Gaudencio Schirripa, President of the Federation of 
Hairdressers of Argentina (FAPYA) states that the petitioner obtained 14 awards between 1968 and 1993 for 
various hair styling events. The petitioner also received two first-place awards at the Iberoamerican Festivals of 
Hairstyle and Color in 1981 and 1982. The petitioner provides no information regarding the competitors, 
selection criteria, or national or international recognition of these awards. The petitioner also received a Martin 
Fierro award in 1994 and a Blanca Podesta award for his hairstyling and makeup work for Argentinean 
television programs. However, the record is unclear whether the Blanca Podesta award is for television or 
theater. The letter of Gaudencio Schirsi~a (facsimile dated Mav 13. 2004) describes the award as "like the I \ 
-- 
Tony award, but for Buenos Aires theater." However, a letter ' of the letterhead 
stationery of "Te Le Fe" suggests that the award was granted for t e petitioner's work on a television 
program. The record does not explain this conflicting information regarding the Blanca Podesta award 
although the burden is on the petitioner to resolve such inconsistencies by independent objective evidence 
and doubt cast on any aspect of the petitioner's proof may entail a reevaluation of the reliability and 
sufficiency of the remaining evidence. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591 (BIA 1988). In addition, the 
record contains no independent evidence of the competitors, selection criteria, or national recognition of the 
Martin Fierro and Blanca Podesta awards. Most importantly, even if these awards reflect the petitioner's past 
national and international acclaim in Argentina and South America, they do not establish that he sustained that 
acclaim over the ten years since his departure from Argentina and prior to the filing of his petition. 
Counsel contends that the petitioner need only show acclaim that has been "'sustained' over a period of years," 
not necessarily sustained to the time of filing. Counsel further maintains that "[tlhis should especially be when 
considering the career of a person who, because of general economic or other reasons in his home country, is 
forced to seek a career elsewhere." Counsel's contention is without merit and is refuted by both the law and the 
record. The statute and regulation require acclaim that is sustained to the time of filing. The plain language of 
the statute is clear. The word "sustain" is defined as "to support or maintain," Black's Law Dictionary 1461 
(Bryan A. Garner ed., 7" ed., West 1999), and "to keep . . . going continhously." Oxford American Dictionary 
927 (Eugene Ehrlich et al. eds., Heald Colleges ed., Oxford U. Press 1980). "Continuously" is defined as 
"continuing, without a break." Id. at 186. Furthermore, if the statute required only a discrete period of past 
acclaim, it would be internally inconsistent. An alien who has not sustained his acclaim because of an inability 
to work in his field would be unable to meet the statutory requirement that he "enter the United States to 
continue work in the area of extraordinary ability." Section 203(b)(l)(A)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1153(b)(l)(A)(ii). In fact, the petitioner has been working as a hair stylist in the United States since at least 
2000, four years prior to the filing of his petition. The absence of any awards since 1994 suggests that the 
petitioner has not been able to earn or sustain national or international acclaim as a hair stylist over the last 
decade preceding the filing of his petition. The petitioner's past awards are thus insufficient to meet this 
criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classijication is sought, 
which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or intemationai 
experts in their disciplines orfields. 
The director correctly concluded that the petitioner presented no evidence to meet this criterion. In his reply to 
the director's request for evidence, counsel stated that the petitioner was "not only a member but an officer of 
the Argentinian [sic] Federation of Hairstylists." The only evidence that might support this claim is the letter 
from Gaudencio Schirripa (facsimile dated May 13, 2004). Although the letter confirms that the petitioner was 
a FAPYA member, such membership does not appear to be exclusive. Mr. Schirripa describes FAPYA as a 
"national professional organization . . . which has over 3,000 members." FAPYA is thus a trade organization for 
hairdressers, mere membership in which cannot meet this criterion. No evidence was submitted to show that 
FAPYA requires outstanding achievements of its members. 
Published material 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. 
The director correctly found no evidence to meet this criterion. On appeal, the petitioner submits an article 
about him from a Spanish newspaper. The petitioner provides no circulation or other information about the 
newspaper that warrants its consideration as major media. Most importantly, as previously stated, the article 
was published after the petition was filed and consequently cannot be used to establish the petitioner's eligibility 
at the time of filing. Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. 
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 alliedBeld of specification for which classification is sought. 
The director found no evidence in the record regarding this criterion. However, the record contains one relevant 
letter. The letter of Gaudencio Schirripa (facsimile dated May 13, 2004) states that the petitioner served as a 
judge for FAPYA competitions approximately 20 times between 1980 and 1990 and served as president of the 
FAPYA Artistic Committee that judges all FAPYA competitions. Mr. Schirripa explains that the petitioner was 
chosen by "his peers . . . as the head of the judging committee, showing their opinion that he was qualified to 
judge national and international competitions." Although that position indicates the petitioner's past acclaim as 
a hairstylist in Argentina, it does not establish that he sustained that acclaim in the decade succeeding his work 
as,a FAPYA judge and preceding the filing of his petition. Consequently, the petitioner does not meet this 
criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in theBeld at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The director found no evidence that the petitioner's work had been displayed at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. Although this category relates most directly to the visual arts, counsel claims that the petitioner has 
met this criterion by giving master classes. By definition, a master class is educational and not readily 
equivalent to an artistic exhibition or showcase. Even if we accepted a master class as comparable evidence 
under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(4), we would still find the record deficient. The petitioner submitted 
evidence of only one master class, a flier for a class given by the petitioner in 1992 in Peru. This class occurred 
over a decade prior to the filing the petition and is insufficient to indicate sustained national or international 
acclaim. Accordingly, the petitioner fails to meet this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has perJormed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that 
have a distinguished reputation. 
The director correctly determined that the petitioner did not meet this criterion. Gaudencio Schinipa states (in 
the undated letter submitted on appeal) that the petitioner's past presidency of the FAPYA Artistic Committee 
was "a critical position in our organization and Mr. Tello was one of our highest-ranked official [sic]." Yet the 
petitioner apparently held that position over a decade ago and the record contains no evidence of FAPYA's 
distinguished reputation.' Counsel also maintains that the petitioner's work in television and film meets this 
criterion, but the evidence does not support his assertion. The record contains three short letters that merely 
verify the petitioner's work as a hair stylist and makeup artist for television and film companies in Argentina. 
Two letters verify the petitioner's receipt of the Martin Fierro and the Blanca Podesta awards for his work on 
television programs. Yet these awards do not show that the petitioner played a leading or critical role for the 
television or production companies. Indeed, one letter states that the petitioner was employed as a contractor. 
In addition, no evidence is offered to show the distinguished reputation of the companies for which the 
petitioner worked. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signijkantly high remuneration for services, 
in relation to others in theJield. 
The director correctly concluded that the petitioner did not meet this criterion. The only evidence of the 
petitioner's remuneration is a letter from Mario Boucon entitled "Contract Management." The letter states that 
the petitioner earned a monthly salary of $3,500 from 1993 to 1996 as a "Stylist and Artistic Makeover [sic]" for 
three shows. Petitioner presents no documentation of how his salary compared to that of others in his field in 
Argentina at that time. On appeal counsel states that petitioner's remuneration "constituted a high salary in 
relation to others in the field in Argentina in those years," but we cannot accept counsel's unsupported assertion 
as evidence. Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503,506 (BIA 1980). 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act only if the alien can 
establish extraordinary ability through extensive documentation of sustained national or international acclaim 
demonstrating that the alien has risen to the very top of his or her field. The petitioner bears this substantial 
burden of proof. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. The petitioner in this case has not sustained that 
burden. The evidence indicates that the petitioner was a successful hair stylist in Argentina in the 1980s and 
early 1990s, but the record does not establish that he sustained the national or international acclaim required for 
aliens of extraordinary ability. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
1 
None of the evidence submitted states when the petitioner held the FAPYA position, but the record 
indicates that he must have held the position while working as a hair stylist in Argentina in the 1980s and 
early 1990s.