dismissed EB-1A Case: Jiu-Jitsu

U.S. Citizenship _· 
and lmmi,gration 
Services 
MATTER OF F-F-D-S-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 27, 2019 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a jiu-jitsu coach, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § l l 53(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 Forni 1-140, Immigrant Petition. for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Petitioner had satisfied ·only one of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of 
which he must mee\ at least three. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence and asserts that he meets at least 
three of the ten criteria. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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 m the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantiafly benefit prospectively the 
United States. I . . 
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 
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 ~ecognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, then he or she 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
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). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4) allows a petitioner to submit comparable 
material if he or she is able to demonstrate that the standards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) do not 
readily apply to the individual's occupation. 
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. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) 
(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 . 20~3); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 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 l&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that he has received a major, internationally 
recognized. award, he 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 Petitioner met only one of 
the initial evidentiary criteria. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that he satisfies six of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) directly "or with comparable evidence now introduced." For the reasons 
q.iscussed below, we find that he has not satisfied the initial evidentiary requirements. 
A. Regulatory Criteria 
Documentation of the . alien ·s membership in associations in the field for which 
class(fication is sought. which require outstanding achievements o_f'their members. as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or.fields. 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). . 
As evidence that he meets this criterion, the Petitioner refers to a statement from 
, president of the an article from 
Wikipedia titled and a letter from 
a sports business executive and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Black Belt. 1 
. ' 
1 The Petitioner alternately indicates that the submitted documentation constitutes "comparable" evidence relating to this 
2 
.
Maller of F-F-D-S-
In order to satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner must show that he is a member of an association, and 
that membership in the association is based on being judged by recognized national or international 
experts as having outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is sought. 2 Although 
the materials demonstrate the Petitioner's affi I iation with the record lacks evidence 
demonstrating membership requirements for this association to show that , it requires outstanding 
achievements , as judged by recognized national or international experts. While we also note that the 
Petitioner received a black belt from he has not established that this constitutes a 
membership in an association · and provides no additional evidence demonstrating the process or 
requirements for selection as a black belt. For these reasons the Petitioner has not shown he 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 whici1 classification is 
sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and 
any necessary translahon 8 C.F.R . § 204 .5(h)(3)(iii). 
Although the Director determined that the Petitioner fulfilled this criterion, we disagree and will 
withdraw that finding. The record does not contain published material about the Petitioner in 
professional or major trade publications or other major media, including the title, date, and author. 3 
It contains a 2010 article entitled in Veja, a Portuguese language magazine, 
but the article was not accompanied by a full English language translation as required by the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). Because the Petitioner did not submit a properly certified 
English language translation of the article, we cannot meaningfully determine whether it meets the 
requirements of this criterion. Regardless , the article does not appear to be about the Petitioner 
relating to his work as a jiu-jitsu instructor, nor did he provide evidence demonstrating that Veja is a 
professional or major trade publication or other form of major media. 
The record also includes an article titled from 
tmzsports.com. This article is not about the Petitioner nor does it mention him, but it instead 
discusses a altercation withan alleged robber at home.4 Articles that 
are not about a petitioner do not fulfill 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 regarding 
a show are not about the actor). We also note that the article in the record does not identify the 
author of the material, as required by the criterion. Furthermore , the Petitioner did not provide 
criterion. We discuss the Petitioner's comparable evidence claim below. 
2 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 6 (providing an example of admission to membership in the 
National Acadeiny of Sciences as a Foreign Associate that requires individuals to be nominated by an academy member, 
and membership is ultimately granted based upon recognition of the individual's distinguished achievements in original 
research). ( 
3 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 7. 
4 The record contains a notarized ~tatement by indicating that the Petitioner has trained him in Brazilian jiu-
jitsu since December 2014. 
3 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
documentation demonstrating that tmzsports.com is a professional or major trade publication or 
other major medium. 
, Finally, the record contains two articles from abc-7.com titled 
and 
Both of these articles are about the Petitioner in his capacity as a jiu-jitsu coach. However, the 
record lacks evidence demonstrating that abc- 7 .com is a professional or major trade publication or 
other major medium. For these reasons the Petitioner did not show that he satisfies this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific. scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sigtJificance in the.field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
In order to satisfy the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), a petitioner must establish that not only 
has he made original contributions but that they have been of major significance in the field. The 
Petitioner asserts on appeal that he meets this criterion , but does not ident_ify specific evidence for us 
1 ' to consider. The Petitioner iriitially provided a letter and other documentation relating to this 
criterion. In one letter , a sports business executive and Brazilian 
Jiu-Jitsu Black Belt, states that the Petitioner has made a.positive "impact in [Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu] 
history, spreading the fundaments [sic] of the martial art t·o thousands of people that were once his 
student, supporting people to overcome personal, social and health problems, and becoming better 
elements for society overall." The record also contai'ns a statement from · 
naming the Petitioner as the international representative of for "his singular work in the field 
of this martial art, national and international contribution to the expansion and preservation of 
traditional ... " In addition, of the 
noted that the Petitioner "provides realistic and practical Jiu-Jitsu training tailored to 
law enforcement/correctional officers." He co1nmends the Petitioner for "his continued dedication 
to and the citizens of ____ it is a testament of his abilities, character, and 
generosity." 
The above letters do not provide sufficient information, nor does the record include adequate 
corroborating documentation, to demonstrate how the Petitioner's work as a jiu-jitsu coach has been 
a contribution of major significance to the field. Letters that specifically articulate how the alien's 
contributions are of major significance to the field and its impact on subsequent work add value. 
Letters that lack specifics and make broad , unsupported assertions do not add value, and are not 
considered to be probative evidence that may form the basis for meeting this criterion. 5 
Evidence that the alien has per/aimed 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 found that the Petitioner had not demonstrated he performed a leading or critical role 
for an organization with a distinguished reputation, and. referenced a letter in th~ record from 
5 USCIS Policy Memoranduin PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 9. 
4 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
On appeal, the Petitioner argub that the Director did not analyze the 
correct evidence, and instead identifies two pieces of documentation from the that he asserts 
establish his performance in a critical role for that office. 
Regarding a critical role, the evidence must demonstrate that a petitioner has contributed in a way 
that is of significant importance to the outcome of the organization or establishment's activities. It is 
not the title of a petitioner's role, but rather the performance in the role that determines whether the 
role is or was critical. 6 The Petitioner argues that the memo from to 
the Petitioner, serves as "a specific professional request to operate a CRITICAL ROLE." (Emphasis 
in original.) states in this memo that trainers are certified to train law 
enforcement and corrections staff in but that "they needed to expand their 
knowledge and abilities to provide a well-rounded product for our deputies." He notes that " ... 
several of trainers have trained with [the Petitioner] several Jimes a week. The skills and 
techniques that our trainers are learning during these sessions continues to expand their confidence 
and abilities to train the techniques to oui· deputies." Here does not provide 
detailed and probative information addressing how the Petitioner's role as a jiu-jitsu coach has 
contributed in a way that is of significant importance to the outcome of activities. 
Moreover, in this memo recommends that "formally contract with [the 
Petitioner] to provide advisory and technical defense. tactics" including "tactic specific instructions 
[sic] and practical application ·of skills on a bi-monthly basis as needed" for the In the 
. second document, a contract between the Petitioner and indicates that the Petitioner "shall 
conduct course for personnel at the 
upon reasonable notice." 7 As described in this part of the memo and in the 
contract, the Petitioner's contributions are prospective, rather than demonstrating that he is 
performing or has already performed a critical role for as required. Without information and 
evidence documenting the impact and importance of any work the Petitioner has conducted for 
the record does not demonstrate the critical nature of his role for this organization. 
The Petitioner also argues on appeal that qualifies as an organization with a distinguished 
reputation, saying that reputation is unquestionable as it is a government agency. In support 
of this assertion, the Petitioner provides a printout of a Wikipedia article titled 
" 8 This article provides a general description of the office of county sheriff in Florida, as 
well as a list of the sheriff's duties as provided for in the Fl_orida statutes. However, this article lacks 
information on the or its reputation, nor does the record include other evidence on this issue. 
6 Id. 
7 We note that this contract was executed in March 2018, after the instant petition had been filed. Even were this 
document to establish that the Petitioner met the criterion, he must do so at the time of filing. Eligibility must be 
established at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.2(b)(I), (12); Matier of Katigbak, 14 l&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg'! Comm'r 
1971. . 
8 Wikipedia is an online, open source~ collaborative encyclopedia that explicitly states it cannot guarantee the validity of 
its content. See General Disclaimer , Wikipedia (Feb. 11 , 2019), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_discla 
imer; Badasa v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 2008). 
5 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signfficantly high 
remuneration for services, in relation lo others in the .field 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(ix) . 
In order to · satisfy this criterion ·, a petitioner must demonstrate that he commands a high salary or 
othe~ significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others in his field. 9 The record 
contains uncertified copies of the Petitioner's 2016 and 2017 tax returns. These tax returns show 
that the Petitioner earned a salary of $6,660 in 2016 and $8,090 in 2017. 10 The returns further show 
that the Petitioner additionally received business income in the amounts of $39,072 in 2016 and 
$77,911 in 2017. We note that other documentation in the record indicates that the Petitioner is the 
proprietor of which does business as 
While the tax returns indicate that the Petitioner's principal business or profession is "Jiu Jitsu 
Instructor, " the record lacks evidence demonstrating that this business income equates to his salary 
or income as an instructor. 
The record also includes screenshots from paysa.com and simplyhired.com which list salaries for the 
top 10% of martial arts instructors as $33,517 and $72,674, respectively. 11 However, the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated that salaries of martial arts instructors represent an accurate basis of 
comparison for his earnings. As noted above, the record lacks sufficient documentation to establish 
his salary as a jiu-jitsu instructor in either 2016 or 2017. In addition , we note that previously 
submitted screenshots from indeed.com, which reflected average salaries in locales within Florida, 
indicated thatjiujitsu coaches earn significantly more than "martial arts" instructors. 12 
B. Comparable Evidence 
On appeal, the Petitioner indicates that comparable evidence has been submitted relating to three 
criteria: membership at 8 C.F.R. § 204 .5(h)(3)(ii), leading or critical role at 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(viii), and commercial success at 8 C.F.R . § 204.5(h)(3)(x). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(4) allows for comparable evidence if the listed criteria do not readily apply to his 
occupation. 13 A petitioner should explain why he has not submitted evidence that would satisfy at 
least three of the criteria set forth in 8 C.F.R . § 204.5(h)(3) as well as why the evidence he has 
included is "comparable" to that required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 14 Here, the Petitioner has 
not shown why he cannot offer evidence that meets at least three of the criteria. General assertions 
9 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005 . 1, supra, at I I. 
10 Neither tax return indicates the payer of these salaries, and the tax returns do not include W-2s . 
11 We note that these screenshots do not identify the geographic area from which this data was collected . 
12 The screenshots indicate that , in North Fort Myers and Naples respectively, jiu jitsu coaches earn an average of 
$67 ,000 and $66 ,000 , while martial arts instructors earn $39 ,000 and $38 ,000 . · 
u See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1 , supra , at 12. 
14 Id. 
Matter of F-F-D-S-
that any of the ten objective criteria do not readily apply to an occupation are not probative and 
should be ·discounted. 15 The fact that the Petitioner did not submit documentation that fulfills at least 
three is not evidence that a jiu-jitsu coach could not do so. For these reasons, the Petitioner did not 
show that he is eligible to meet· the initial evidentiary requirements through the submission· of 
comparable evidence. Furthermore, the Petitioner has not explained or established how the 
documentation he has provided is comparable to the listed criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required ini_tial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
! · documents that meet at least three of the ten ·criteria. · As a result, we need not provide the type of 
final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise 
that we have reviewed the record in the aggregate, concluding that it does not support a finding that 
the Petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofF-F-D-S-, ID# 2118436 (AAO Feb. 27, 2019) 
ts Id.. 
.,