dismissed EB-1A Case: Human Beauty And Nutrition

U.S. Dapa&ment of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Wm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
FEE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: ww ; J A -F .. ~JJ; 
sac ss ooa 51252 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiaq: 
PETITION: I grant 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. $ li 153(b)(1)(A) 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Ad~nistrative Appeals Office in your case. A11 documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
%obert 3?. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employmnt-based i grant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service 
Center, md is now before the AdG~strative Appeals OEce on appeal. The appeal wiU be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based idgrant pursuant to section 2@3(b)(l>(A) sf the 
hmig-ation and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(T)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
dkctor detemined the petitioner had not established that she qualifies for ~Bassification as a? alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(11) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified i grants who are aliens 
described in sf the following subparagraphs (A) though (C): 
(A) Aliens with Extraordinary Ability. -- h alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the dien has exaaordinay ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonsb-ated by sustained national or intemdoaad acclaim 
and whose acliaievemnts have been recognized in the Geld though extensive 
documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
[iii) the ailen's entry to the United States will substantialnPly benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
As used in this section, the tern "extraordinay ability" means a level of expertise indicating that tine 
individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the Geld of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
5 284.5(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.P.W. 5 204.5(1a)(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 fop level. 
This petition, filed on October 1, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as 
a "Specialist of Human Beauty, Massage, Nutrition." The statute and regulations require the petitioner's 
acclaim to be sustained. The record reflects that the petitioner has been residing in the United States since 
August 2002. Given the length of time between the petitioner's arrkvaP in the United States and the petition's 
Cling date, it is reasonable to expect the petitioner 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 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). Baing the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at least thee of which 
Page 3 
mast be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of 
ext~aordinaay ability. The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criterki. 
Documents tion of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awardsfor excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted an "Honor Ce~tificate" issued by The Chinese Refom and Development Secretarial 
Members' Ass~ciation~~ on December 30, 2000. English language tanslation accompanying the Honor 
Certificate states: 
Comrade: [the petitioner's name] 
Based on your conbibutions toward the society, and you outstanding achievement in your field of work, 
you have been chosen the "Person with Excellent Ability of 'the Cente~~y" on the first ceremony of the 
'6Nowadays Chinese Citizen with Excellent Ability." 
This Certificate is the proof of this award. 
There is no evidence of publicity sunounding the petitioner's receipt of this award or evidence showing that it 
enjoys a significant Bevel of recognition. h this case, the record contains no supporting documentation from 
the awarding entity or print media to establish that the petitioner's award is a nationally recognized award for 
excellence. Furthemore, pursuant to 8 C.F.W. 5 103.2(b)(3), any document containing foreign language 
submitted to Citizenship and I gation 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 
Re or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English. The translation accompanying the 
petitioner's Honor Certificate was not certified as required by the regulation. 
Docunzentation of the alien's membenhip in associations in the field for which classification 
is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their membeq as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
h order ", 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 w 
experience, standardized test scores, g~ade point average, recornendations by colleagues or current 
members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion as such requirements do not constitute outstanding 
achievements. h 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. 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that her "acugunctlare certificate of a national membership" issued by the 
Republic of China Human Resources Department satisfies this criterion. The secosd, however, does not 
include the membership bylaws or official admission requirements for this organization. There is no evidence 
showing that admission to membership in this association required outstanding achievement or that the 
petitioner was evaluated by national or international experts in consideration of her admission to  embers ship. 
E~idence ofthe alien's authorship ofscholarEy articles in the field in professional or major trde 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted a ""Nomination Notification" letter allegedly issued by the Hang Mong Economic 
Trade Council's International Commerce Center and the Hong Mong Press Publisher. The nomination 
notification letter has two blank spaces into which the petitioner's name and the name of her cosmetic product 
lare hand written. 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that this nomination notification Better represents a "patent notification" 
which satisfies this criterion. We note, however, that tanis letter represents a solicitation for a book entry 
rather than first-hand evidence of the petitioner's patent. 
The English language translation of the nomination notification letter states: 
You Face Beauty and Whtening Skin Lotion (Beauty and Whitening Powder) has been evaluated, it 
has met the standads of China the Beat [sic1 Choice of ExceBPent Patent & Technology. 
The book's aim is to give the best response to the world about the Chinese patent and technology, and 
to encourage creativity, develop China Science & Technology Achievement. The main objective is to 
market the newest science and technology patents in China. 
China the Beat [sic1 Choice of Excellent Patent B Techaaoiogv collects more than 1000 patents 2nd 
techoEogies . . . . 
Due to time limit, we ask of you to Tale the admission application as soon as possible. The first 
publication of the book is scheduled during the first season sf 1996. 
There is no evidence showing that the petitioner's product was published in this book, nor is there any official 
documentation originating from the Chinese Patent Office establishing that the petitioner has been issued a 
patent. 
The petitioner also submitted what she alleges is evidence of her authorship of an article entitled "Salvage the 
Sunburned Skin" in People Health Newspaper. The translation accompanying this was not certified as 
required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2@)(3). Furthermore, there is no evidence showing that this 
article was actually published under the petitioner's name or evidence of its significant national or 
international distribution. Nor is there supporting evidence showing that the petitioner's article is viewed 
thoughout her field as significantly influential. 
3~ this case, the petitioner has failed to demonsbate that she meets at least the 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 my 
be said to Rave achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be witkn 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 btematbtional level. Therefore, the petitioner has not established 
eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(I)(A) of the Act and the petition may not be appmved, 
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 
%etter(s) from prospective employer(s), evidence of prearranged co tmerats such as contracts, or a 
statement from the beneficiary detailing glans on how he or she &tends to continue his or her work in the 
United States." The September 12, 2004. letter accompanying the petition does not adequately detail how the 
petitioner intends to continue her work in the United States. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO eve2 if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initkaH decision. See 
Spencer Enterp~ises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2004), afd 345 P.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.