dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-A-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 11, 2019 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a martial arts fighter, seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in athletics. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(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 Nebraska Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Petitioner had not provided documentation satisfying the initial evidence 
requirements set forth at 8 C.F.R § 204.5(h)(3), which requires documentation of a one-time 
achievement or evidence that meets at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. 
In his appeal, the Petitioner argues that the Director erred in finding he did not meet the initial evidence 
requirements set forth at 8 C.F.R § 204.5(h)(3). The Petitioner further states that the evidence 
demonstrates his standing as an individual of extraordinary ability. 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
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 substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
Matter of A-A 
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). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, then he or she 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. 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 of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record shows that the Petitioner is a competitive athlete in thel I style of karate who has 
competed in local, national, and international sparring, or kumite, competitions since 1999, 
predominantly in Armenia, his native countr:. In 2005, at age 16, he received a certificate from the 
I , ~ levidencing he achieved a black belt inl I karate. 
The Petitioner seeks to continue to train and compete in karate competitions in the United States. 
A. Major International Award 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) states that a petitioner may submit evidence of a one-time 
achievement that is a major, internationall reco nized award. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains 
that his first place finish in the .__-----,,----..L......:a::..:.t.....:t=h-=-e-=I =====r ________ ___.l 
I 12013 Open Championship is a major, internationally recognized award. .__ _________ ___. 
The Petitioner's initial submission contained a copy of his award certificate, and photographs of himself 
with his trophy and on the winner's podium. Within his response to the Director's request for evidence 
(RFE), the Petitioner submitted a letter froml I the international president of 
the I I who states that the event was "an International Karate Cup Championship, where athletes 
from many European countries were present." He explains that the Petitioner participated in the 
2 
Matter of A-A 
competition as part of the three-member Armenian team, and he calls the Petitioner's first place finish an 
"extraordinary result." 
The aforementioned documentation, however, does not demonstrate the international import of the 
tournament or establish that the first place trophy or~ certificate from the competition is 
recognized beyond the participants and organizers of thel____Jevent at a level commensurate with a 
major, internationally recognized award. The Petitioner has not shown that placing first among his 
pool of division contenders is indicative of international recognition in the martial arts. For example, 
although .__ ___ ...,....,.... ___ __.indicates that the event "attracted thousands of athletes and audience" 
there is no documentary evidence showing the number of contenders who fought in the men's 
I I division in which the Petitioner competed, or that they underwent a rigorous 
international selection process in order to compete in the tournament. In addition, there is no evidence 
showing that the Petitioner's fight attracted a substantial audience, received a significant amount of 
international media coverage, or was otherwise internationally recognized. 
Given Congress' intent to restrict this visa category to "that small percentage of individuals who have 
risen to the very top of their field of endeavor," the regulation permitting eligibility based on a one­
time achievement must be interpreted very narrowly, with only a small handful of awards qualifying 
as major, internationally recognized awards. Congress' example of a one-time achievement is a Nobel 
Prize. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990). The regulation is consistent with this legislative 
history, stating that a one-time achievement must be a major, internationally recognized award. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The selection of Nobel Laureates, the example provided by Congress, is reported 
in the top media internationally regardless of the nationality of the awardees, is a familiar name to the 
public at large, and includes a large cash prize. Although an internationally recognized award could 
conceivably constitute a one-time achievement without meeting all of those elements, it is clear from the 
example provided by Congress that the award must be internationally recognized in the petitioner's field 
as one of the top awards in that field. In the present matter, the evidence submitted does not establish that 
the Petitioner's first place trophy or award certificate in the I !division at the 2013 I !Open 
Championship is a major, internationally recognized award. 
In light of the above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated a qualifying one-time achievement pursuant 
to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
B. Evidentiary Criteria 
As an alternative to demonstrating that the Petitioner has received a major, internationally recognized 
award, he must satisfy at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 1 
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 Director determined that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for this criterion. The 
evidence pertaining to the Petitioner's first place finish in the I I division at the 2013 
1 We have reviewed all of the evidence the Petitioner has submitted and ~ill address those criteria the Petitioner asserts that he 
meets or for which the Petitioner has submitted relevant and probative evidence. 
3 
Matter of A-A 
~-~I Open Championship ~-------~has already been discussed in part A, above. As 
previously mentioned, the evidence submitted does not show that the Petitioner's aforementioned first 
place trophy or award certificate is internationally recognized in the martial arts field. Furthermore, 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated that either of them is a nationally recognized award for excellence 
in the field of endeavor. A karate competition may be open to athletes from throughout a particular 
country or countries, but this factor alone is not adequate to establish that an award or prize from that 
competition is nationally or internationally recognized. The burden is on the petitioner to demonstrate 
the level of recognition and achievement associated with his award. The submitted documentation 
does not establish that the Petitioner's award had a substantial level ofrecognition beyond the context 
of the event where it was presented and was therefore commensurate with a nationally or 
internationally recognized prize or award for excellence in the field. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted evidence of his podium finishes in competitions at the adult level, 
including in the following: 
• A first olace certificate received at the I }o17) .___ ____________ ___. 
• A second place certificate in kumite form in the adult I O I category received at the 
I I 8th EuroP,ean] l.cham12ionshi12s (2016) 
• A first place certificate received at thel _ _: : : : b Cup 
~ 12014) 
• First and second place certificates in kumite form in the adult category received at the~I -~ 
Championship (2014, 2013, 2012, 2010 and 2007) 
• A first place certificate in the adult I I category received at the~-------~ 
I , , IE.astern Martial Arts Federation Armenia Open Tournament (2013) 
• A first place certificate in the adu]tl J category received at the Armenian National 
Association of thq !Open c .... h_a_m ...... p_io_n_s_h ...... ip_( ..... 2_0_13 ..... ) ________ _, 
• First place certificates received at the Armenian~---.------------=-----~ 
Open Championship~ 12012, 2011) 
• First, second, and third place certificates in the adult category received at Armenian National 
I !Championships (2012, 2011, 2010, 2008, 2007) 
• A second place certificate in kumite form in the adult I I category received at the 
,__ _______________ ---r-__._C-"--h--'a-'--m----"-,ionship ~ 12009) 
• A first place finish in kumite form in the adult~---~ category received at the ~I -~ 
~-----------~10th Open championship (2..QQ.2L 
• A second place certificate in kumite form received at the L__J World Championship 
d 12008) 
The Petitioner also provided awards certificates evidencing his podium finishes in youth competition 
between 1999 and 2006. 2 
2 The record also contains evidence that in 2018 the Petitioner took second place in a I I Open karate competition, 
and received a commendation from the mayorl I California, adding his name to a list of top Armenian athletes in 
the state. However, the Petitioner received those awards after the date the petition was filed on August 21, 2017. The Petitioner 
must establish that all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of the filing and 
continuing through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 
4 
Matter of A-A 
The plain language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) specifically requires that the Petitioner's 
awards be nationally or internationally recognized in the field of endeavor and it is his burden to establish 
every element of this criterion. With regard to the aforementioned awards, the Petitioner did not submit 
evidence demonstrating their national or international recognition in the field of karate or in the general 
area of martial arts. The documentary evidence submitted does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's 
first, second, and third place certificates were recognized at a level commensurate with nationally or 
internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field. For example, the Petitioner did not 
submit supporting documentary evidence in the form of official entry requirements from the 
sponsoring organizations of these events or other evidence to establish the significance of the events 
within the sport. 
Further, the Petitioner submitted the aforementioned certificate for his successful completion of a 
training course and attainment of a black belt '---------,-..---------'karate, but this certificate 
does not equate to nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field. 
The black belt certificate reflects that the Petitioner earned a promotion in rank based on his successful 
completion of a karate skills test, but he has not established that his promotion to this rank constitutes 
either a prize or an award, nor has he submitted documentation, such as media reports, demonstrating 
that his rank has received national or international recognition. 
Finally, the Petitioner has submitted two letters from .__ ______ ~the president ofthe~I --~ 
who states that in 2005 the Petitioner was chosen by the Armenian Karate Federation (AKF), the 
national governing body of the sport, to be a member of the I I He explains that the 
Petitioner was selected for the I latter achieving a podium finish in thel I 
Championship. The Director did not address this evidence. We find the Petitioner's podium finish in 
the I I championship, which resulted in his appointment to the Armenian I ,I 
sufficient to qualify as a nationally recognized award for excellence in the field. In light of the above, 
the Petitioner has established that he meets this regulatory criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
class[fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or _fields. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
In order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion a 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, proficiency certifications, standardized test scores, grade point average, 
recommendations by colleagues or current members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy 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 maintains that he satisfies this criterion based upon his membership in the World Karate 
Federation (WKF), the I I and the Armenian I I However, the record does 
5 
Matter of A-A 
not include evidence of the membership requirements for the WKF or the I I such as bylaws or 
rules of admission showing that those organizations require outstanding achievements of their 
members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in the Petitioner's field or an allied 
one. 
The Petitioner also maintains that he satisfies this criterion based on his membership on the Armenian 
I I in the sport of karate. The Petitioner has submitted the aforementioned two letters from 
I l the president of the I I who states that in 2005 the Petitioner was chosen by 
the AKF to be a member of the Armenian! I. He explains that the Petitioner was selected 
for the I I after achieving a podium finish in the I I Championship, and 
subsequently undergoing specialized training and winning the finals round of competition in his age 
and weight group. As previously mentioned, the Director did not address this evidence. We find that 
the Petitioner meets this criterion based on his selection for Armenia' sl I 
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 classification is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessa,y 
translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that he satisfies this criterion based on "published materials about 
[him] in the national newspapers, as well as through media outlets." The record contains evidence 
that he was interviewed in 2017 for a sports program on PanArmenian TV, a U.S.-based Armenian 
television channel. A translated transcript of the interview demonstrates that it was about him and 
related to his work, including his career achievements. Within the Petitioner's response to the 
Director's RFE he provided a media kit from PanArmenian TV indicating the channel is "[a]vailable 
on most major Southern California Cable Television providers." However, the record does not 
demonstrate who interviewed the Petitioner or the date when the interview was broadcast. In addition, 
the Petitioner did not provide documentary evidence of the viewership statistics for the specific 
television program on which the interview was broadcast. 
The Petitioner also provided an article pertaining to the Petitioner dated 2006 and published in the 
newspaper of the Armenian National Agrarian University (ANAU). Upon review, this article does 
not satisfy the plain language of this criterion, as it is not about the Petitioner, but about the Yerevan 
Martial Arts Club, and does not identify the author of the material. 
In addition, the record contains a translation of an article pertaining to the Petitioner that he asserts 
was published on the website verdadzortert.com. We note that neither the translation nor the 
translator's certification identify the source where the article was published. The Petitioner also 
provided a letter from the editor of Vardadzor indicating it is a regional newspaper with a print 
circulation of 10,000 to 15,000 readers per month and a website at www.vardadzortert.com. The letter 
does not provide evidence showing that the number of visitors to Vardadzor' s website elevates the 
newspaper to a form of major media relative to other online news sources. 
The Petitioner further provided an article about himself dated 2018 and published on the website 
yerkirmedia.am. However, this article was published after the date the petition was filed on August 
21, 2017. As stated previously, the Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for the 
6 
Matter of A-A 
immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through 
adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(1 ). Finally, we note that the record contains several documents that 
appear to be translated excerpts of an interview of the Petitioner for Armenia First Television Italy 
and an article from "Germany Bremen." However, since the Petitioner has not submitted the original 
source documents this evidence cannot be considered "published material" under this criterion. In 
light of the above, the Petitioner has not established that he meets this regulatory criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scient[fic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sign[ficance in the field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v). 
On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the Director has not given "appropriate weight" to testimonial 
letters in the record that discuss "[his] fighting techniques, his qualifications, etc." The Petitioner 
submitted letters of support from his personal contacts discussing his achievements as a karate 
competitor. The record lacks evidence showing that the Petitioner has made original athletic 
contributions that have significantly influenced or impacted his field. 
The Petitioner submitted the two aforementioned letters froml I who states that the 
,.....:P::....:e:::t.::.:it.::..::io::.:::n~e.::....r'~s....::f:.::::1r~st.::...t'..p.::.:la~c.:::..e....::.f..::.::m.::.:.i:::::sh.:::,:e:::::s....:a::.::t....:t..::.::h.:::..e ....:2:..:::0:...:::.1.::..3=::;-----,=====;-r---..,.... in Ital)"' and the 201 7 c=J 
in conferred UQOn him "national ,and, 
international recognition for his achievements ... in his ........, _ _____,,__.category." I I andLJ 
I l martial arts instructors in the United States, state that they met the Petitioner at the latter 
competition, and describe him as very talented and hardworking with exceptional fighting skills. D I I a martial arts instructor who has offered the Petitioner employment in the United 
States as a competitive karate athlete, mentions that in 201 7 the Petitioner trained at his facility and 
was featured in the above-referenced interview on PanArmenia TV. The Petitioner provided the 
above-referenced letter from.__ _______ ___,in which he describes and praises the Petitioner's 
"very unique and difficult" sparring technique. He also highlights the Petitioner's second place finish 
at the in 2008. 
The letters considered above primarily contain attestations of the Petitioner's status in the field without 
providing specific examples of contributions that rise to a level consistent with major 
significance. Letters that specifically articulate how a petitioner's contributions are of major 
significance to the field and its impact on subsequent work add value. 3 Letters that lack specifics and 
use hyperbolic language do not add value, and are not considered to be probative evidence that may 
form the basis for meeting this criterion. 4 Moreover, USCIS need not accept primarily conclusory 
statements. 1756, Inc. v. The US. Att'y Gen., 745 F. Supp. 9, 15 (D.C. Dist. 1990). 
While the Petitioner has competed in tournaments and participated in extensive karate training, he has 
not shown how these activities equate to "original" athletic contributions of major significance in the 
3 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form T-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADI 1-14 8-9 (Dec. 22, 2010). 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. 
4 Id. at 9. See also Kazarian, 580 F.3d at 1036, affd in part 596 F.3d at 1115 (holding that letters that repeat the regulatory 
language but do not explain how an individual's contributions have already influenced the field are insufficient to establish 
original contributions of major significance in the field). 
7 
Matter of A-A 
field. According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v), the contributions must be not only 
original but of major significance. While this suggests that the Petitioner is knowledgeable and skilled 
in karate, it does not establish that he has made original athletic contributions of major significance in 
the field. Although the Petitioner has earned the admiration of his references, the evidence submitted 
does not demonstrate that his impact on the sport is commensurate with an original athletic 
contribution of major significance in the field. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role/or organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that he performed in a leading or critical role for the Arm::,::e:.::.:n..:.,:ia::::n::=1 ====: 
I I in his role as an athlete on the team in 2005, because he asserts that all._l ____ __, 
members "must possess and exhibit special skills and achievements, which set them apart from their 
peers." The scope of this evidentiary criterion, however, focuses on the relative importance of the 
Petitioner's role for distinguished organizations. In general, a leading role is evidenced from the role 
itself: and a critical role is one in which the petitioner contributed in a way that is of significant 
importance to the outcome of the organization or establishment's activities. 5 
The Petitioner has not submitted evidence to support his assertions on appeal. The record does not 
contain, for example, evidence that would establish that the Petitioner's position with the Armenian 
.__ ______ ___.was in a leading or critical role, such as team rosters, team statistics or other 
documentation of his tenure with the Armenian! I The Petitioner's evidence does not 
elucidate how the Petitioner's position differentiated him from the other karate athletes on the Armenian 
~--------,, such as its senior players. In the above-referenced letters,~ _____ ___. 
primarily attests to the Petitioner's work ethic and sportsmanship, but nothing in his statement suggests 
that the Petitioner was considered to have performed in a leading or critical role. For the above reasons, 
the evidence submitted by the Petitioner does not establish that he was responsible for the Armenian 
~---------' success or standing to a degree consistent with the meaning of "leading or critical 
role." Further, the record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Armenian! I 
I I has a distinguished reputation in the field. In light of the above, the Petitioner has not 
established that he satisfies this evidentiary criterion. 
C. Summary 
For the reasons discussed above, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner is not eligible because he 
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). Thus, we need not folly 
address the totality of the materials in a final merits determination. 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 level of expertise required for the classification 
sought. 
5 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 10. 
8 
Matter of A-A 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. 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. Comm'r. 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of his athletic accomplishments is indicative of the required 
sustained national or international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in 
the field" as contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has 
garnered national or international acclaim in the field, and he is one of the small percentage who has 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not shown that he qualifies for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability 
under section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with 
each considered as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. In visa petition proceedings, 
it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter of Skirball Cultural Ctr., 25 I&N Dec. 799, 806 (AAO 2012). Here, 
that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of A-A-, ID# 3998911 (AAO Sept. 11, 2019) 
9