dismissed EB-1A Case: Jiujitsu

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF F-F-D-S-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 13,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a jiujitsu instructor and coach, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary 
ability in athletics. 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 Petitioner had not satisfied any of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of 
which he must meet at least three. In addition, the Director determined that the Petitioner had not 
shown that the regulatory criteria did not readily apply to his occupation, and therefore did not meet 
the comparable evidence requirements. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that he meets at least three of the ten criteria directly or with 
comparable evidence. With his appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) ofthe 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 substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
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 recognized award). Alternatively, he or she must provide documentation that meets 
at least three of the ten categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) (including items 
such as awards, memberships, and published material in certain media). 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 his or her 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. US CIS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 20 I 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). 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 ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner provided letters indicating that he has worked as a Brazilian jiujitsu instructor for 
in Florida since August 2015. As he has not established 
that he has received a major, internationally recognized award, the Petitioner must satisfy at least 
three of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). In denying the petition, the Director found 
that the Petitioner did not meet any of the regulatory criteria. On appeal, the Petitioner contests the 
Director's findings regarding two criteria: membership at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) and high salary 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix). 1 In addition, he offers evidence relating to the published material 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). The Petitioner asserts that he meets at least three criteria 
directly "or with comparable evidence now introduced." 
1 
While the Petitioner previously claimed eligibility for the judging criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), he does 
not continue to do so on appeal, nor does the record support a finding that he meets it. The Director noted that the 
Petitioner did not specify whose work he judged. Providing instruction and training to martial arts students is not 
tantamount to participation as a judge of the Work of others. The phrase "a judge" implies a formal designation in a 
judging capacity, either on a panel or individually as specified in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv). Informal 
instances of evaluating one's students as an instructor or coach do not meet the elements ofthis criterion. As the 
Petitioner has not contested the Director's determination on this issue, we will not further address this criterion in our 
decision. 
2 
.
Matter ofF-F-D-S-
In order to rely on comparable evidence, a petitioner must demonstrate why a specific criterion is not 
readily applicable to his occupation, and how the submitted evidence is comparable to that 
criterion. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4). Here, the Petitioner does not identify the specific criteria 
under which he offers comparable evidence, explain why the criteria do not apply to a jiu jitsu 
instructor, or establish how the documentation is comparable. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not 
established that he meets the requirements of the provision at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(4). In addition, for 
the reasons discussed below, the record does not support a finding that the Petitioner satisfies at least 
three 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). 
Although not discussed in the Director's decision, the Petitioner previously submitted four 
certificates from the naming him ' 
in 2008, 2009, 2011, and 2013. The record, however, does not include sufficient 
, evidence to demonstrate that the aforementioned certificates are nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the Petitioner's field. In his appeal brief~ the Petitioner 
also mentions 
that "with only two years of work in the United States as a technician," he "conquered 
numerous titles," but the 
record does not contain sufficient evidence of his receipt of jiujitsu titles or 
documentation indicating that they constitute nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in the field of endeavor? Accordingly, he has not established that he meets 
this regulatory criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the fieldfor which class~fication 
is sought, which require outstanding achievements o.ftheir members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines orfields. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
With the appeal, the Petitioner offers his membership card. The record also includes a20 15 
letter from · president of stating that as a ' of 
the federation, the Petitioner is "in a select group of holders of the most genuine skills and 
knowledge in this martial art." further notes that the Petitioner "is the only 
from teaching in southwest Florida, but does ncit list the specific requirements 
for membership in or for advancement to that belt level. The aforementioned evidence is 
insufficient to show that attaining a third degree black belt through successful demonstration of skills 
or knowledge in a belt promotion test constitutes a membership requiring outstanding achievements. 
Furthermore, the evidence does not indicate that members' achievements are judged by 
recognized national or international experts. The Petitioner therefore has not established that he 
meets this criterion. 
2 
While the appellate submission contains a photograph of the Petitioner wearing multiple medals that bear inscriptions 
such as'' and' 'there is insufficient evidence identifying the recipient(s) of the medals and 
demonstrating that they are nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his sport. 
3 
.
Matter of F-F-D-S-
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in the.fieldfor which classification 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 provides a 2010 article entitled ' in 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 is a professional or major trade publication or other form of major media. 
In the appeal brief, the Petitioner indicates that he and ' 
· were responsible for "the graduation of many student candidates to the 
Black Belt" and that the event was broadcast by the website, "a channel 
specialized in sport events." He further states that, at another graduation event performed in the 
United States, he and were present and that their 
photographs appeared on the Facebook page for The appellate submission 
includes multiple photographs from the aforementioned events. The evidence, however, does not 
include a full transcript of the broadcast to demonstrate that the material was about 
the Petitioner. Furthermore, the record does not include the title, date, and author of the media 
coverage. Lastly, the Petitioner has not offered supporting documentation showing that 
is a form of major media. Accordingly, he has not established that he meets this 
regulatory criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signfficantly high remuneration 
for services, in relation to others in the.field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix). 
The Petitioner initially submitted a December 2014 letter from offering him the 
position of head instructor for Brazilian jiujitsu at a starting salary of "$20.00 per hour," or $41,600 
annually. In addition, he provided information from indeed.com reflecting that jiujitsu coaches earn 
an average salary of$67,000 per year in and $66,000 per year in and that 
"martial arts instructors" earn an average salary of $39,000 and $38,000 in those locations, 
respectively. In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner offered his 2015 Form 
1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, reflecting total income of $25,280. The Director 
concluded that the salary information from showed that the Petitioner's wage and 
earnings were not indicative of a high salary in relation to others in the field. 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides an amended Form 1040 for 2015 reflecting total income of 
$49,7803, which he contends falls within the average range noted in the Director's decision. We 
3 
We note that one of the three Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, forms submitted as part of the Petitioner's 
4 
Matter of F-F-D-S-
note that the Petitioner's income from jiu jitsu instruction still falls below the aforementioned 
average yearly salaries for jiujitsu coaches in Florida. Regardless, the criterion requires that the 
Petitioner has commanded a high salary or sign(ficantly high remuneration relative to others in his 
field. The Petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner is not eligible because he has not submitted the .required initial evidence of either a 
qualifying 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). Thus, we do not need to fully address the totality of the materials in a 
final merits determination. Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 119-20.4 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 level of expertise required for the classification sought. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of F-F-D-S-, ID# 553458 (AAO Sept. 13, 201 7) 
revised 2015 tax return indicates that $9,880 of his income derived from a "principal business or profession" in~olving 
"janitorial services" rather than jiujitsu coaching or instruction. 
4 
In addition, as the Petitioner has not established his extraordinary ability under section 203(b )(I )(A)(i) of the Act, we 
need not determine whether he is coming to "continue work in the area of extraordinary ability" under section 
203(b )(I )(A)(ii). 
5