dismissed EB-1A Case: Ice Skating

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwan-an ted 
invasion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: A~R 1 6 2009 
LIN 07 03 1 52328 
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. $ 1 153(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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
/Yf!&piPCI- 
, Jo . Gnssom 
v~ctin~ Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska 
Service Center and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will 
be dismissed. 
The petitioner, an ice rink and skating school, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an ernployment- 
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 in athletics. The director determined 
the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary has earned the sustained national or 
international acclaim necessary to qualifjr for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. More 
specifically, the director found that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate the beneficiary's receipt of 
a major, internationally recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3). 
On appeal, counsel argues that the beneficiary meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
$204.5(h)(3) and that the petitioner submitted comparable evidence of her extraordinary ability 
pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(I) 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. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (INS) have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for 
individuals seeking immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 
60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). 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. 5 204.5(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. § 204.5(h)(3). The relevant 
criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that 
the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on November 13, 2006, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an alien with 
extraordinary ability as an ice skating trainer and a coach. The record reflects that the beneficiary 
has coached for Stamford Twin Rinks since 2004. Aside from her activities as a coach and a trainer, 
the record includes evidence showing that the beneficiary competed successfully in national and 
international ice dancing competitions from the 1990s through 2002. Subsequent to 2002, there is 
no evidence indicating that the beneficiary remained active in national or international ice dancing 
competition. Further, according to Part 6 of the Form 1-140 petition, "Basic information about the 
proposed employment," and an August 10, 2006 letter from the Director of Stamford Twin Rinks, 
the beneficiary (age 25 at the time of filing) is seeking work in the United States as an ice skating 
trainer rather than as a competitive ice skater or an ice dancer. The statute and regulations require the 
beneficiary's national or international acclaim to be sustained and that she seeks to continue work in her 
area of expertise in the United States. See sections 203(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. $8 1153(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii), and 8 C.F.R. $8 204.5(h)(3) and (5). While a competitive 
skater and a coach may share knowledge of the sport, the two rely on very different sets of basic 
skills. Thus, competitive athletics and coaching are not the same area of expertise. This 
interpretation has been upheld in Federal Court. In Lee v. INS., 237 F. Supp. 2d 914 (N.D. Ill. 
2002), the court stated: 
It is reasonable to interpret continuing to work in one's "area of extraordinary ability" as 
working in the same profession in which one has extraordinary ability, not necessarily in any 
profession in that field. For example, Lee's extraordinary ability as a baseball player does 
not imply that he also has extraordinary ability in all positions or professions in the baseball 
industry such as a manager, umpire or coach. 
Id. at 918. The court noted a consistent history in this area. In the present matter, there is no 
evidence showing that the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim through 
achievements as a competitive ice skater subsequent to 2002. Further, the evidence is clear that the 
beneficiary intends to work as an ice skating trainer and a coach for Stamford Twin Rinks. While 
the beneficiary's competitive accomplishments as an ice dancer are not completely irrelevant and 
will be given some consideration, ultimately she must satisfy the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5@)(3) 
through her achievements as a trainer and a coach. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally 
recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, 
at least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to 
qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. A petitioner, however, cannot establish the beneficiary's 
eligibility for this classification merely by submitting evidence that simply relates to at least three 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5@)(3). In determining whether the beneficiary meets a specific criterion, 
the evidence itself must be evaluated in terms of whether it is indicative of or consistent with 
sustained national or international acclaim. A lower evidentiary standard would not be consistent 
with the regulatory definition of "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. 8 204.5(h)(2). The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria.' 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in thejeld of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted evidence showing, inter alia, that the beneficiary and her ice dancing 
partner won 1" place in the "Final Cup of Russia" in 2001 and 2002. However, there is no evidence 
indicating that the beneficiary has received any nationally or internationally recognized awards in 
her sport since 2002 or that she intends to continue competing as ice dancer in the United States. As 
discussed previously, the statute and regulations require the beneficiary's national or international 
acclaim to be sustained and that she seeks to continue work in her area of expertise in the United States. 
See sections 203(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $8 1153(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii), and 8 C.F.R. 
9s 204.5(h)(3) and (5). While the beneficiary's awards as a competitive athlete are not completely 
irrelevant and will be given some consideration, ultimately she must satisfjr the regulatory criterion 
at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3)(i) through her achievements as a coach and trainer. As such, the 
beneficiary's awards and competitive results demonstrating her past record of success as a national 
and international ice dancing competitor fiom the 1990s to 2002 cannot serve to meet this regulatory 
criterion. 
Nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards won by ice skating competitors coached 
primarily by the beneficiary, however, can be considered for this criterion. In that regard, the 
petitioner submitted evidence showing the competitive achievements of the beneficiary's junior 
skaters and -1 
The petitioner submitted documentation showing that - placed 2" out 
seventeen couples in the Intermediate Free Dance Finals at the Lake Placid Ice Dance 
- 
Championships in 2006, lSt out of four couples in the Intermediate Free Dance Finals at the 2006 
Boston Open, 2nd out of six couples in the Intermediate Dance category at the 2007 New England 
Championships on October 21,2006, 2nd out of thirteen couples in the "Intermediate Dance Group A 
(QR)" Finals at the 2007 U.S. Junior National Championships on November 30,2006, and 5& out of 
fourteen couples in the Intermediate Dance Finals at the 2007 U.S. Junior National Championships 
on December 2, 2006. - achievements at the 2007 U.S. Junior National 
Championships post-date the filing of the petition. A petitioner must establish the beneficiary's 
eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. $8 103.20>)(1), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 
49 (Regl. Commr. 1971). Accordingly, the AAO will not consider competitive achievements fiom 
the 2007 U.S. Junior National Championships in this proceeding. 
With regard to Is achievements, the petitioner submitted an October 27, 2005 article in 
the Greenwich Post stating: 
I 
 The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this decision. 
was recently chosen as one of only 100 junior figure and hockey skaters from 
the Northeast region to skate on-ice with national and international world champions at the 
Sarah Hughes and Friends IceTravaganza Show. . . at Nassau Coliseum in Uniondale, N.Y. 
The seven-year-old Laurel Springs School third grader participated in the recent Stars, 
Stripes and Skates Talent Search at Danbury Ice Arena. 
She is coached by Frances Gold Lind, with additional coaching by and [the 
beneficiary]. 
The article further states that candidates were judged "solely on their performance acumen, not 
technical skill." This article indicates that "Frances Gold Lind" was the principal coach of Claire 
Uygur when she was chosen for the show. Further, we cannot ignore counsel's statement on page 
three of her appellate brief indicating that the beneficiary followed her "world-renowned coach, 
, who had coached many other ice dance teams to top three finishes in such 
presti ous contests as the Olympics and the World Championships, to Stamford, Connecticut, 
where had a permanent position with STR [Stamford Twin   inks]."^ In this case, it is 
the petitioner's burden to demonstrate that the beneficiary's role in her athlete's success was rim 
rather than attenuated by others such as 
 or Pary 
Nevertheless, the petitioner has not established that 
 selection for the show as one of 100 
junior figure and hockey skaters fiom the Northeast region is tantamount to a nationally or 
internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in figure skating. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits documentation showing that mplaced lst in the 
"Unrestricted Pre-Preliminary Group C" Female Championship Solo Free Skate at the 2007 State 
Games of America in Colorado Springs, lSt in the "Pre-preliminary Girls Group H Final Standings" 
at the 82" Mid-Atlantic Figure Skating Championslups in September 2007, and 2" in the 
"Preliminary Girls - Group D category at the 2008 Darien Open 
similar competitive results from 2007 and 
appellate submission includes letters from 
 mother of 
and, mother of 
 indicating that the beneficiary 
served as their daughters' coach and discussing their daughters' competitive achievements in 2007 
and 2008.) , and competitive results post-date the 
filing of the petition. A petitioner must establish the beneficiary's eligibility at the time of filing. 
8 C.F.R. 55 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter ofKatigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the AAO is not 
required to consider this evidence in this proceeding. 
2 
 The achievements of Indicate that the very top of the beneficiary's field is a level above her present 
level of coaching achievement. 
letter identifies the beneficiary as 
 "primary figure skating coach," but the letter from 
states that Bess has only worked with the beneficiary "for two hours every week." 
With regard to the beneficiary's athletes' awards in competitions such as the Mid-Atlantic Figure 
Skating Championships and the New England Championships, such awards reflect regional 
recognition rather than national or international recognition. Regarding awards won in "Junior," 
"Intermediate," or age-group competition, we do not find that successfully coaching their recipients 
demonstrates that the beneficiary "is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of 
the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). USCIS has long held that even athletes performing at 
the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary ability" standard. Matter of Price, 
20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Cornmr. 1994); 56 Fed. Reg. at 60899.~ Likewise, it does not follow that 
a skating coach who has had success coaching athletes at the "Junior" or "Intermediate" level should 
necessarily qualify for an extraordinary ability employment-based immigrant visa. To find otherwise 
would contravene the regulatory requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2) that this visa category be 
reserved for "that small percentage of individuals that have risen to the very top of their field of 
endeavor." In this case, there is no evidence showing that top athletes (such as senior national 
competitors) coached primarily by the beneficiary have won nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets hs 
criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
classzjkation is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
In order to 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 or experience, standardized test scores, grade point average, recommendations by 
colleagues or current members, or payment of dues, do not satisfj this criterion as such requirements 
do not constitute outstanding achievements. Further, the overall prestige of a given association is 
not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements rather than the association's overall 
reputation. 
The petitioner submitted a letter from the Figure Skating Federation of Russia stating that, as a 
competitor in the 1990s and early 2000s, the beneficiary represented Russia as a member of its 
- -- 
4 
 While we acknowledge that a district court's decision is not binding precedent, we note that in Matter of Racine, 1995 
WL 153319 at *4 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 16, 1995), the Court stated: 
[Tlhe plain reading of the statute suggests that the appropriate field of comparison is not a comparison of 
Racine's ability with that of all the hockey players at all levels of play; but rather, Racine's ability as a 
professional hockey player within the NHL. Ths interpretation is consistent with at least one other court in this 
district, Grimson v. INS, No. 93 C 3354, (N.D. Ill. September 9, 1993), and the definition of the term 8 C.F.R. 
4 204.5(h)(2), and the discussion set forth in the preamble at 56 Fed. Reg. 60898-99. 
Although the present case arose within the jurisdiction of another federal judicial district and circuit, the court's 
reasoning indicates that USCIS' interpretation of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(h)(2) is reasonable. 
national team. In this case, "the field for which classification is sought" is coaching and instruction. 
Further, the beneficiary was selected for the team based on her ability as a competitive athlete, not as a 
coach. As such, the beneficiary's athletic participation as a member of the Russian national team, 
before she was active as a coach, cannot serve to meet this regulatory criterion. 
The petitioner submitted a certificate stating that the beneficiary attained the "rank of the 
International Class Master of Sport of Russia in figure skating." As evidence of the requirements for 
this certificate, the petitioner submitted information about the "United Sports Classification System 
of the U.S.S.R." from Wikipedia. With regard to information from Wikipedia, there are no 
assurances about the reliability of the content from this open, user-edited internet site.5 See Lamilem 
Badasa v. Michael Mukasey, No. 07-2276 (gth Cir. August 29, 2008). Accordingly, we will not 
assign weight to information for which Wikipedia is the only cited source. Nevertheless, the 
beneficiary earned this rank based on her ability as an athlete, not as a coach. 
The petitioner submitted the beneficiary's membership card for the U.S. Figure Skating Association and 
a form letter fiom its president welcoming her as a member. The letter states that "the organization now 
has nearly 200,000 members." The petitioner also submitted information from the U.S. Figure Skating 
Association's internet site stating: "You can become and individual member online! It's quick and 
easy - go to the membership form!" According to the documentation submitted by the petitioner, 
anyone can become a member simply by registering online and paying an $85 membership fee. There 
is no evidence showing that this association requires outstanding achievements of its members. 
The petitioner submitted the beneficiary's membership card for the Professional Skaters Association 
(PSA). The petitioner also submitted general information and application material fkom the PSA's 
internet site, but there is no evidence showing that the association requires outstanding achievements of 
its  member^.^ We cannot conclude that being 18 years of age, teaching more than 5 hours per week, 
5 
Online content from Wikzpedia is subject to the following general disclaimer: 
WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GURANTEE OF VALIDITY. Wikipedia is an online open-content collaborative 
encyclopedia, that is, a voluntary association of individuals and groups working to develop a common resource 
of human knowledge. The structure of the project allows anyone with an Internet connection to alter its content. 
Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by people with the expertise required 
to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information. . . . Wikzpedia cannot guarantee the validity of 
the information found here. The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or 
altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields. 
See httv:l/en.wikivedia.ordwilu/Wikivedia:General disclaimer, accessed on April 9, 2009, copy incorporated into the 
record of proceeding. 
"The PSA Membershp Categories and Fees" section of the PSA's internet site states: 
Full Membership: New $1 15, Renewal $120. Refers to all ice skaters 18 years & older, who teach more than 5 
hours per week and are interested in the general advancement of the profession and to Program Directors who 
are employed by a rink or club to direct skating programs. This membership also applies to Skate Technicians 
Page 8 
and declaring an interest in the general advancement of the profession are tantamount to outstanding 
achievements. 
In this case, there is no evidence showing that the beneficiary holds membership in an association 
requiring outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by recognized national or 
international experts in her field or an allied one. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that 
the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
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 classijcation is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary 
translation. 
In general, in order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be primarily about the 
beneficiary and, as stated in the regulations, be printed in professional or major trade publications or 
other major media. To qualify as major media, the publication should have significant national or 
international distribution. An alien would not earn acclaim at the national level l?om a local or regional 
publication. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, nominally serve a particular locality but 
would qualify as major media because of significant national distribution, unlike small local community 
papers. 
7 
The petitioner submitted a three-sentence captioned photo of the beneficiary and her skating partner in 
the December 29, 2003 issue of the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, but there is no evidence (such as 
circulation statistics) showing that this local newspaper qualifies as a form of major media. Further, 
the plain language of this regulatory requires published material "relating to the field for which 
classification is sought." We cannot conclude that a captioned photograph indicating that the 
beneficiary performed in an ice show relates to her work as a trainer or coach, or that the photograph 
meets the other requirements of this regulatory criterion. 
As discussed, the petitioner submitted an October 27, 2005 article in the Greenwich Post entitled 
"Uygur to skate with champions," but the article only mentions the beneficiary's name in passing. 
The plain language of this regulatory criterion requires that the published material be "about the 
alien." Further, the author of the material was not identified as required by 8 C.F.R. 
who are at least 18 years of age and who are presently employed for remuneration as a skate repairer, sharpener 
or person fitting skates either as a proprietor or with a business selling, repairing, sharpening or fitting skates 
(defined as boots as well as boots and blades) and is so engaged in such work at least 20 hours per week. 
See htt~://www.skate~sa.com/Catemries-and-Feeh, accessed on April 9, 2009, copy incorporated into the record of 
proceeding. 
7 
Even with nationally-circulated newspapers, consideration must be given to the placement of the article. For example, 
an article that appears in the Washington Post, but in a section that is distributed only in Fairfax County, Virginia, for 
instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii) and there is no evidence showing that the Greenwich Post qualifies as a form of 
major media. 
The petitioner submitted an undated article entitled "Timur Aslakhanov - first Chechen figure 
skater" and a May 12,2002 article entitled "[The beneficiary] and Timur - future of Russia's figure 
skating" posted online at ChechnyaFree.ru, an internet site for "Free Chechnya radio station" which 
broadcasts in Russian and Chechen. The date of the first article was not provided and it was 
A 
primarily about 
 rather than the beneficiary. Further, the authors of the two 
preceding articles were not identified as required by the plain language of this regulatory criterion 
and the material did not relate to the beneficiary's work as a trainer or coach. On appeal, the 
petitioner submits page 335 of the 2007 World Radio TV Handbook: The Directory of Global 
Broadcasting identifying the radio station and its internet site in the Russian "National Radio" 
section of the handbook. The petitioner also submits the results of a "Dow Jones Factiva Source 
Search" stating that ChechnyaFree.ru is a "[nlews agency providing daily social, political, and 
business news from Republic of Chechnya." While the preceding documentation indicates that the 
radio station and its internet site are national media outlets, there is no evidence (such as readership 
statistics) indicating that the radio station's online publication qualifies as a form of "major media" 
as required by the plain language of this regulatory criterion. 
The petitioner submitted printouts from various internet sites reflecting that video tapes of 
competitions in which the beneficiary competed were available for sale online. The petitioner also 
submitted evidence of a video posted on YouTube showing the beneficiary and her partner skating at 
the "Russian nationals" in 1998. The plain language of this regulatory criterion requires "published 
material about the alien" including "the title, date and author of the material." The preceding 
evidence does not meet these requirements. Nevertheless, there is no evidence showing that the 
video footage of the beneficiary was broadcast by major media outlets. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a June 14, 2007 article in the Bulletin (Wilton, Connecticut) 
entitled "More gold medals for"   his article states that , a sixth grader, is 
in her "fourth year of competitive figure skating" and that "[hler primary coach is - 
' The petitioner also submits a June 2007 article and a May 9, 2008 article in the Wilton 
Villager entitled 'makes it 10 straight golds" and has a golden weekend." The 
preceding articles from 2007 and 2008 were published subsequent to the petition's filing date. A 
petitioner must establish the beneficiary's eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. $8 103.2(b)(l), 
(12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the AAO is not required to consider 
these articles in this proceeding. Nevertheless, the preceding articles were not primarily about the 
beneficiary and there is no evidence that they were published in major media rather than local media. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientijc, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contributions of major signzjkance in the field. 
We acknowledge the petitioner's submission of several reference letters praising the beneficiary's 
talents as a skater and a coach. Talent and employment in one's field, however, are not necessarily 
indicative of original artistic contributions of major significance. The record lacks evidence showing 
that the beneficiary has made original contributions that have significantly influenced or impacted 
her field. 
1994 Olympic Champion, Ladies Figure Skating, states: 
I want to write this letter of support for [the beneficiary] because I know she is a skater, and 
coach with a specialty in choreography, of extraordinary ability. [The beneficiary] and I both 
trained in Russia in the early years of the 1990s, when I was practicing to become a World 
and Olympic Champion and she was a star ice dancer in our country. I was 16 years of age 
when I won m 01 
 ic medal but [the beneficiary] was even younger that year when she 
competed with 
 in ice dancing at the Russian national championships and 
also in international competitions. Even before that, [the beneficiary] competed in ice 
dancing at the National Championships and in international competitions at the Junior level, 
even though she was only 10 years old! 
[The beneficiary] is especially known for her gracefulness and artistry and her extraordinary 
talent in a discipline, ice dancing, which requires great precision, musical interpretation, and 
creativity. Even one of the top coaches in the world today, still talks about [the 
beneficiary's] abilities at such a young age and her talents as a world-class choreographer in 
figure skating. Having such competitive experience at a very young age helps [the 
beneficiary] to coach especially young skaters who have the talent to be champions. 
Coach and Choreographer, Ice House Skating ~ink,8 states: 
I have known [the beneficiary] for many, many years, since we were young skaters in Russia. 
[The beneficiary] and I competed as an ice dancing team for Russia in 1994-95. . . . [The 
beneficiary] was one of the top ice dancers in Russia for many years. I personally was very 
surprised that [the beneficiary] missed earning a spot on Russia's Olympic team in 2002 by 
only one place; my own sense is that she and her partner should have placed in the top three 
that year. 
With regard to his own accomplishments as a coach, 
 states: 
Students I have coached to Olympic and World medals include 
 of Japan, who won the 
Olympic Ladies Gold Medal in 2006; of Japan, who won the 2007 World Ladies Gold Medal; 
of Japan, who won the 2007 World Men's Silver Medal; -dm 
of Canada, who won the 2003 World Ice Dancing Gold Medal; and 
 and m 
I 
of Russia, who won the 2006 Olympics Ice Dancing Bronze Medal. 
The achievements of indicate that the very top of the beneficiary's field is a level above her present level 
of coaching achievement. 
[The beneficiary] has always demonstrated an extraordinary level of talent, grace, and 
creativity in the sport of figure skating. It is these skills that make her an irreplaceable 
member of the professional coaching staff at Stamford Twin Rinks, where I have skated with 
my own students. [The beneficiary] would not have qualified to compete at the senior level at 
such a young age without having remarkable interpretive ability, agility, and discipline that 
most skaters do not possess. Her dance and ballet training also made her an unbelievably 
beautiful and imaginative skater - talents that now allow her to be an extraordinary 
choreographer and technical coach for many young skaters with very promising competitive 
futures. 
As a coach and choreographer for several of the top skaters in the world today, I can say 
without qualification that I consider [the beneficiary] to be one of the most talented skaters, 
coaches, and choreographers I have ever met. 
Champion, 2002-06 European Pairs Champion, and 2003-05 Russian Pairs Champion, states: 
[The beneficiary's] extraordinary achievements at such a young age give her an ability that 
very few skating coaches have, to instill in young competitive skaters the discipline, focus, 
artistry and technical skills they must have to become champions. [The beneficiary's] ability 
to combine technical skills with artistry and grace, which have allowed her young students to 
excel in competition under the new, complicated judging system, is very rare to find in our 
sport. 
I have known [the beneficiary] for many years, when we practiced and competed together for 
our countries. 
I think that [the beneficiary] offers skating students in the United States something that no 
other coach can, and that is an understanding of how much hard work and discipline it takes 
to become a national and international competitor starting at a very young age. There are 
many young skaters who want to become champions, and [the beneficiary] has the personal 
experience of competing at the Junior level in Nationals at age 10 and at the Senior level in 
Nationals and ISU events at age 13 . . . . [The beneficiary] also has extraordinary artistic 
talent, combined with uncommon grace and flexibility. These assets make her an 
unbelievably gifted choreographer and technical coach, which is rare to find in our sport. 
On appeal, counsel states: 
As a choreography coach, [the beneficiary] is responsible for using the music selected for her 
student's program to create an entertaining and visually pleasing and technically challenging 
routine that includes all the elements required by the International Skating Union (ISU), as 
dictated in the International Judging System ("IJS") guidelines, which are the rules and 
regulations that apply to all major figure skating competitions in the United States . . . . 
Thus, every new skating routine [the beneficiary] produces serves to be an original creation, 
a creation that, upon its exhibition in a figure skating competition, will seen by [sic], and thus 
affect, other choreographers' approaches to skating routine construction. 
Counsel does not specifically identify any skating routines produced by the beneficiary that have 
affected other choreographers' approaches to the extent that they constitute original contributions of 
major significance in the field. There is no evidence showing that any of the skating routines 
produced by the beneficiary have significantly influenced or impacted her field in a manner 
consistent with sustained national or international acclaim. 
With regard to the beneficiary's achievements as a skater and a coach, the letters of recommendation 
do not specify exactly what the beneficiary's original athletic contributions have been, nor is there an 
explanation indicating how any such contributions were of major significance in her field. 
According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3)(v), an alien's contributions must be not only 
original but of major significance. We must presume that the phrase "major significance" is not 
superfluous and, thus, that it has some meaning. While the beneficiary may have helped various 
young athletes with their skills, choreography, and training, there is nothing in the reference letters 
indicating that she has developed original training techniques, routines, or skating methodologies 
that have been recognized, widely adopted, or otherwise significantly impacted her field in manner 
consistent with sustained national or international acclaim. Even if the techniques utilized by the 
beneficiary were found to be original, there is nothing to demonstrate that they have had major 
significance in the field. For example, the record does not indicate the extent of the beneficiary's 
influence on others in her sport nationally or internationally, nor does it show that the field has 
somehow changed as a result of her work. 
In this case, the petitioner has submitted letters from impressive experts whose opinions are 
important in figure skating and ice dancing. The letters of recommendation submitted by the 
petitioner, however, are not sufficient to meet this criterion. The opinions of experts in the field, 
while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a successful extraordinary ability claim. 
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. 
See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Cornmr. 1988). However, USCIS is 
ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the 
benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters fiom experts supporting the petition is not presumptive 
evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support 
the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. Thus, the content of the experts' statements and how they 
became aware of the beneficiary's reputation are important considerations. Even when written by 
independent experts, letters solicited by an alien in support of an immigration petition are of less 
weight than preexisting, independent evidence of original contributions of major significance that 
one would expect of a trainer or coach who has sustained national or international acclaim. Without 
extensive documentation showing that the beneficiary's work has been unusually influential, highly 
acclaimed throughout her field, or has otherwise risen to the level of original contributions of major 
significance, we cannot conclude that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the jeld at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. 
The petitioner submitted photographs of the beneficiary and her students taken during competition. On 
appeal, counsel argues that the beneficiary's work as an ice dancer and as a choreographer meets this 
regulatory criterion. The plain language of this regulatory criterion indicates that it applies to visual 
artists (such as sculptors and painters) rather than to ice skating coaches such as the beneficiary. The 
ten criteria in the regulations are designed to cover different areas; not every criterion will apply to 
every occupation. The beneficiary and her students' participation in national and international ice 
skating competitions has previously been addressed under the awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3)(i). Virtually every athlete "displays" his or her work in the sense of competing in front 
of an audience. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this 
criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a statement prepared by and Skating Directors 
of Stamford Twin Rinks, stating: 
Having [the beneficiary] as a choreographer on staff is allowing us both to retain skaters who 
are reaching higher competitive levels and to attract new ones who are drawn to [the 
beneficiary's] distinctive and renowned skills as an experienced international competitor and ice 
dancing champion, and specialist in artistry and choreography. 
We are also utilizing [the beneficiary's] coaching abilities more broadly in our Skating School, 
which is one of the largest in the country, with more than 1,400 students who are either full 
members of U.S. Figure Skating or are members of the U.S. Figure Skating Basic Skills 
Program. Over the past three years, [the beneficiary] has taught private lessons in ice dancing, 
freestyle, and Moves in the Field to both adults and younger skaters. She has assisted us in 
choreographing and teaching routines for STR's Annual Ice Show. She has choreographed 
numerous competition programs for singles skaters and ice dancing teams. 
[The beneficiary] also contributes off-ice training instruction to our program, teaching classes in 
stretching, fitness, ballet, jump training, and partnering. 
While the record adequately demonstrates that Stamford Twin Rinks has a distinguished reputation, 
there is no evidence establishing that the beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role for the 
facility. For example, there is no evidence differentiating the importance of the beneficiary's role fiom 
that of the other coaches employed by Stamford Twin Rinks, let alone its more senior staff (such as its 
Page 14 
skating directors). The documentation submitted by the petitioner shows that the beneficiary has 
performed admirably for her employer as a coach and a choreographer, but it does not establish that she 
was responsible for Stamford Twin Rinks' success or standing to a degree consistent with the meaning 
of "leading or critical role" and indicative of sustained national or international acclaim. Accordingly, 
the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the beneficiary's receipt of a major, 
internationally recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). The conclusion we reach by considering the evidence to meet each criterion 
separately is consistent with a review of the evidence in the aggregate. Even in the aggregate, the 
evidence does not distinguish the beneficiary as one of the small percentage who has risen to the 
very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(2). 
On appeal, counsel argues that the reference letters from the beneficiary's peers are comparable 
evidence of her extraordinary ability in the field of figure skating. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(4) allows for the submission of "comparable evidence" only if the ten criteria "do not 
readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation." The regulatory language precludes the consideration 
of comparable evidence in this case, as there is no evidence that eligibility for visa preference in the 
beneficiary's occupation cannot be established by the ten criteria specified by the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. 8 204.5@)(3). Where an alien is simply unable to meet three of the regulatory criteria, the 
plain language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(4) does not allow for the submission of 
comparable evidence. 
Nevertheless, the reference letters submitted in support of this petition have already been addressed 
under the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
 204.5(h)(3)(i), (v), and (viii). 
 Further, there is no 
evidence showing that the documentation the petitioner requests re-evaluation of as comparable 
evidence constitutes achievements and recognition consistent with sustained national or international 
acclaim at the very top of the beneficiary's field. While reference letters can provide useful 
information about an alien's qualifications or help in assigning weight to certain evidence, such letters 
are not a substitute for objective evidence of the alien's achievements and recognition as required by the 
statute and regulations. The nonexistence of required evidence creates a presumption of ineligibility. 
8 C.F.R. 8 103.2(b)(2)(i). Further, the classification sought requires "extensive documentation" of 
sustained national or international acclaim. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
8 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3). 
 The commentary for the proposed regulations 
implementing the statute provide that the "intent of Congress that a very high standard be set for aliens 
of extraordinary ability is reflected in this regulation by requiring the petitioner to present more 
extensive documentation than that required" for lesser classifications. 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30704 (July 
5, 1991). Primary evidence of achievements and recognition is of far greater probative value than 
opinion statements from individuals selected by the petitioner. 
Documentation in the record indicates that the alien was the beneficiary of an approved 0-1 
nonirnmigrant visa petition filed in her behalf by Stamford Twin Rinks. While USCIS has approved 
an 0-1 nonimmigrant visa petition filed on behalf of the beneficiary, that prior approval does not 
preclude USCIS from denying an immigrant visa petition based on a different, if similarly phrased 
standard. It must be noted that many 1-140 immigrant petitions are denied after USCIS approves 
prior nonirnmigrant petitions. See, e.g., Q Data Consulting, Inc. v. INS, 293 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 
2003); IKEA US v. US Dept. of Justice, 48 F. Supp. 2d 22 (D.D.C. 1999); Fedin Brothers Co. Ltd. v. 
Suva, 724 F. Supp. 1103 (E.D.N.Y. 1989). Because USCIS spends less time reviewing 1-129 
nonimmigrant petitions than 1-140 immigrant petitions, some nonirnrnigrant petitions are simply 
approved in error. Q Data Consulting, Inc. v. INS, 293 F. Supp. 2d at 29-30; see also Taus A&M 
Univ. v. Upchurch, 99 Fed. Appx. 556,2004 WL 1240482 (5th Cir. 2004) (finding that prior approvals 
do not preclude USCIS from denying an extension of the original visa based on a reassessment of 
the beneficiary's qualifications). 
The AAO is not required to approve applications or petitions where eligibility has not been 
demonstrated, merely because of prior approvals that may have been erroneous. See, e.g., Matter of 
Church Scientology International, 19 I&N Dec. 593,597 (Comm. 1988). It would be absurd to suggest 
that USCIS or any agency must treat acknowledged errors as binding precedent. Sussex Engg. Ltd. v. 
Montgomery, 825 F.2d 1084, 1090 (6th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1008 (1 988). 
Furthermore, the AAO's authority over the service centers is comparable to the relationship between a 
court of appeals and a district court. Even if a service center director has approved a nonirnmigrant 
petition on behalf of the beneficiary, the AAO would not be bound to follow the contradictory decision 
of a service center. Louisiana Philharmonic Orchestra v. INS, 2000 WL 282785 (E.D. La.), afd, 248 
F.3d 1139 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 122 S.Ct 51 (2001). 
Review of the record does not establish that the beneficiary has distinguished herself to such an 
extent that she may be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be 
within the small percentage at the very top of her field. The evidence is not persuasive that the 
beneficiary's achievements set her significantly above almost all others in her field at a national or 
international level. Therefore, the petitioner has not established the beneficiary's 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. 5 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will 
be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.