dismissed EB-1A Case: Humanitarian Aid

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF G-H- INC. 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
"' 
DATE: APR. 26,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a humanitarian aid organization, seeks to classify the Beneficiary as an individual of 
extraordinary ability in business. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(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 Form I-140, ·Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Beneficiary had satisfied only one of the regulatory criteria, of which he 
must meet at least three. 
On appeal, the Petitioner presents previously submitted documentation and argues that the 
Beneficiary meets at least two additional criteria. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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 ofthe 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 natiol}al 
or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized 
in the field through extensive documentation, 
Matter ofG-H- Inc. 
(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 term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top ofthe field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate a 
beneficiary's sustained acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a 
one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized award). Otherwise, the petitioner 
must provide 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). 
Satisfaction of at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this 
classification. See Kazarian v. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 201 0) (discussing 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. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011), aff'd, 683 
F.3d. 1030 (9th Cir. 2012); Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010) (holding that 
the "truth is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality" and that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) examines "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"). Accordingly, where a 
petitioner submits evidence that satisfies at least three criteria, we will then determine whether the 
totality of the record shows sustained national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the 
beneficiary is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Beneficiary is a managing partner and co-founder·of organizations advocating for human rights 
in Nigeria. Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that the Beneficiary has received 
a major, internationally recognized award, it must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). ' In denying the petition, the Director found that the 
Beneficiary met the leading or critical role criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). On appeal, 
the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary satisfies the awards criterion under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i) and the published material criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 1 We have 
1 Although it previously claimed the Beneficiary's eligibility for the membership criterion under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(ii) and the original contributions criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), on appeal the Petitioner does 
not contest the Director's finding, offer further arguments, or submit additional evidence for these criteria, nor does the 
record support a finding that the Beneficiary meets them. Accordingly, we will not address these criteria in our decision. 
2 
.
Matter ofG-H- Inc. 
reviewed all of the evidence in the record, and it does not support a finding that the Beneficiary 
fulfills the plain language requirements of at least three criteria. 
A. Evidentiary 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 Petitioner submitted photographs of four plaques that the Beneficiary received from the local 
Nigerian district of for his local contributions and service, including a 
plaque for being the club president for 2012/2013. In addition, the Petitioner provided two 
certificates of appreciation from the local Nigerian district of acknowledging the Beneficiary's 
roles and contributions in organizing seminars, and a letter from former 
president for Nigerian district who restated the Beneficiary's awards. In order to meet the 
plain language of this criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the Beneficiary's awards are 
nationally 
or internationally recognized for excellence in the field. Although the Beneficiary 
received awards, the Petitioner did not show that the awards are nationally or internationally 
recognized for excellence beyond 
The Petitioner also presented a letter from president for Nigerian district 
and governor for Nigerian district indicating that, during the 
Beneficiary's tenure as president, the club received the presidential award. The Petitioner 
provided the criteria for the presidential award, which is "given to outstanding for 
distinguishing themselves in excellent humanitarian services." Furthermore, stated that 
the Beneficiary led the club to receive an award of excellence as the second best club in the district. 
Again, the letters and award criteria do not demonstrate that these are natio.nally or internationally 
recognized for excellence in the field. In addition, this regulatory criterion requires documentation 
of the Beneficiary's receipt of prizes or awards. Here, the letters reflect that the local 
received the presidential award and second best club in the district award, rather than the 
Beneficiary himself. The Petitioner has not established that these awards should be attributed to him 
personally. 2 For these reasons, the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary meets this 
criterion. 
2 
While they, do not satisfy this criterion, awards garnered by the local Nigerian district during the Beneficiary's 
presidency are relevant for the leading or critical role criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii), which is discussed 
later in this decision 
3 
.
Matter ofG-H- Inc. 
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 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 Petitioner indicates the Beneficiary's eligibility for this criterion· based on articles posted on the 
following websites: 
and In addition, the Petitioner submits 
photographs with captions from and In order for published 
material to meet this criterion, it must be about the Beneficiary, include the title, date, and author of 
the material, and be published in professional or major trade publications or other major media. 
As an initial matter, the Petitioner did not establish that any of these sources are professional or 
major trade publications or other major media. It did not provide documentation regarding the 
readership of the publications or websites, or other information or rationale for considering the 
sources to be qualifying. Moreover, seven of the articles do not contain the titles, dates, or authors 
of the material as required. 
In addition, the articles are not about the Beneficiary; rather, they relate to various community 
projects of the of such as polio eradication, medical screenings, and career 
choices. Although the Beneficiary is mentioned or quoted, the articles do not reflect published 
material about the Beneficiary consistent with the plain language of this regulatory criterion. See, 
e.g., Negro-Plumpe v. Okin, 2:07-CV-820-ECR-RJJ at* 1, *7 (D. Nev. Sept. 8, 2008) (upholding a 
finding that articles about a show are not about the actor). The submission from 
contains a photograph with a caption identifying the Beneficiary; however, there is not an 
accompanying article that discusses the Beneficiary or his work. The Petitioner also provided a 
photograph from that includes a caption indicating that members. of the 
of were involved in a peace walk. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that these 
publications contain published material abqut the Beneficiary relating to his work. For all of the 
above states reasons, the Petitioner has .. not shown that the Beneficiary satisfies this regulatory 
criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
The Director determined that the Beneficiary met this criterion based on his role with 
of the record of proceedings supports the Director's findings for this criterion. 
4 
A review 
Matter ofG-H- Inc. 
B. Summary 
As explained above, the record only satisfies one of the regulatory criteria. As a result, the Petitioner 
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.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
Had the Petitioner satisfied at least three evidentiary categories, the next step would be a final merits 
determination that considers all of evidence in the context of whether or not the Petitioner has 
demonstrated: (1) 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," and (2) that the individual "has sustained 
national or international acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field 
of expertise." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Although we 
need not provide the type of final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, a review of the 
record in the aggregate supports a finding that the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary 
has the level of expertise required for the classification sought. 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not shown that the Beneficiary qualifies for 
classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofG-H-lnc., ID# 351752 (AAO Apr. 26, 2017) 
5