dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF E-G-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAY 14, 2019 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an athlete, seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability in the field of martial 
arts. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § l 153(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 petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Petitioner has received a major, internationally recognized award or met 
the requirements of at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director did not consider evidence submitted in support of 
several evidentiary criteria. 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )(1 )(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 in the area of extraordinary 
ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
Matter of E-G-
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten 
categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material 
in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Satisfaction of at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this 
classification. See Kazarian v. 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), aff'd, 683 F.3d. 
1030 (9th Cir. 2012); Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010) (holding that the "truth 
is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality" and that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) examines "each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, 
and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine 
whether the fact to be proven is probably true"). Accordingly, where a petitioner submits qualifying 
evidence under at least three criteria, we will determine whether the totality of 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a karate competitor who states that he plans to continue to compete in national and 
international competitions. The Director found that the Petitioner met none of the evidentiary criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), and did not establish that he has received a major, internationally 
recognized award. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he meets several of the evidentiary criteria. 
After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we find that he does not meet the initial requirement 
of at least three of the evidentiary criteria. 
A. One-Time Achievement 
In response to the examples mentioned in the Director's decision regarding major, internationally 
recognized awards, the Petitioner notes on appeal that karate has not previously been an Olympic 
sport, and points to "his awards and yizes as a multiple champion of Armenia and as a gold medalist 
during various I . " 
Given Congress' intent to restrict this 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. See H.R. Rep. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990), reprinted in 
1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6710, 1990 WL 200418 at *6739. The House Report specifically cited to the 
Nobel Prize as an example of a one-time achievement; other examples which enjoy major, 
international recognition may include the Pulitzer Prize, the Academy Award, and an Olympic 
Medal. The regulation is consistent with this legislative history, stating that a one-time achievement 
2 
Matter of E-G-
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, reflects a familiar name to the public at large, and includes a large 
cash prize. While 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 global in scope and internationally recognized in the field as one of the top 
awards. 
Here, while the Petitioner does not refer to a specific award or awards on appeal, he previously 
mentioned several in his initial brief and in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE). 
However, the evidence supporting these awards consists solely of certificates and/or photographs of 
the Petitioner or a trophy, without further evidence demonstrating the award's status as a major, 
internationally recognized award. For example, a diploma was submitted from the I I 
I _ !International Karate Cup" which indicates that the Petitioner won first place in his age 
class (14-15) on I I 2010, but no further evidence is provided. The same is true regarding a 
certificate from the Georgian National Karate Federation, indicating that the Petitioner won first place 
in his weight class at the 2015 International Karate Tournament I I 
In addition, the certificate accompanying another one of the awards the Petitioner asserts qualifies as 
a one time achievement, claimed to relate to the~-------------~ inl I 
2014, is not accompanied by a properly certified translation. Any document in a foreign language 
must be accompanied by a full English language translation. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). The translator 
must certify that the English language translation is complete and accurate, and that the translator is 
competent to translate from the foreign language into English. Id. In this case, while the certificate is 
written in Japanese ( an article from the website of one of the participating teams indicates that the 
tournament took place i~ I Japan), the translator's certificate states that he or she is "competent 
to translate Russian from Armenian language into English language ... " Because the Petitioner did 
not submit a properly certified English language translation of this document, we cannot meaningfully 
determine whether the translated material is accurate and thus supports the Petitioner's claims. 
Because the Petitioner has not submitted evidence which establishes that any of the awards claimed 
are among the small number of major, internationally recognized awards, we find that he does not 
have a one time achievement. We will therefore review the evidence submitted under the evidentiary 
criteria below. 
Documentation of the individual'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) 
In addition to the awards mentioned above, the Petitioner submitted numerous certificates which he 
received at karate tournaments in Armenia and abroad. 1 Similar to the previously discussed awards, 
many of these additional awards are not accompanied by supporting evidence of their national or 
international recognition. While several of the certificates include the words "national" or 
1 We note that the Petitioner also listed several awards in his initial brief, and in response to the Director's RFE. for which 
no evidence was provided. 
3 
Matter of E-G-
"international" in the title of the competition, including evidence showing that he earned second or 
third place in several Armenian I !championships, the fact that a competition was open 
to athletes from throughout a particular country or countries does not establish that a prize or award 
from that competition is nationally or internationally recognized. 
The Petitioner has submitted additional information about some of the prizes that he received, but it is 
insufficient to establish that they are nationally or internationally recognized. An article written in 
Armenian, submitted with an English translationr indicates that he won his age and weight class at the 
"World Championship ofl Karatedo" inl I, but the copy of what appears to 
be a newspaper article does not include the publication's name, the name of the author or the 
publication date. Without this information, as well as evidence of the publication's distribution and 
circulation, this evidence does not demonstrate the level of recognition received by this award. Other 
material includes translations of articles which discuss upcoming tournaments in which the Petitioner 
will compete, but neither the original articles nor information about the websites was submitted. 
Therefore, this evidence does not serve to establish that awards received by the Petitioner were 
nationally or internationally recognized. 
Also included in the record is evidence of the Petitioner's participation in several World Karate 
Federation tournaments, including "Karate 1 Premier League" events. This evidence establishes that 
he competed at a high level in his sport, but the evidence does not indicate that he received a prize or 
award at these tournaments. 
After review of the evidence of the Petitioner's awards and their national or international recognition, 
we find that the evidence does not sufficiently establish that he meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the individual'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) 
As evidence of his membership on the Armenian nation! 1 karate team the Petitioner submitted a letter 
from official from I I President of the _ I I I verifies his membership with the c=]and the national team, but does not elaborate 
on the requirements for these memberships. In responding to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner 
submitted a second letter from Vice President of the .......,_ _______ ............ 
.__ ____________ ~_--,-,, who states that the~ is responsible for selecting athletes 
for the national team. He also indicates that he was one of eight judges at the Armenian national 
championships in 2012, where the Petitioner placed first in his age group and thus was included on 
the national team. However, the evidence does not establish that his placings at the Armenian national 
championships in 2012 and subsequent years qualify as "outstanding achievements" as required by 
the plain language of this criterion. While I I indicates "over 100 athletes competed for 
the first three places," it is not apparent whether this refers to the number of competitors in the 
Petitioner's age group or in all age and weight groups combined. Thus the record lacks sufficient 
evidence of the number and caliber of competitors in these competitions, which might reveal whether 
winning an award qualifies as an outstanding achievement. In addition, we note thatl I 
4 
Matter of E-G-
is not a representative of the D which he describes as the bod~onsible for making the national 
team selections, and that the record does not include official L_J rules or other documentation 
describing the selection process and the qualifications of those who determine membership. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has not established that membership on the Armenian national karate team 
requires outstanding achievements, and thus does not meet this criterion. 
Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or 
other major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which class[fication 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) 
As discussed above, the evidence of written materials about the Petitioner and his athletic career, both 
in print and online, lacks information about the media in which they appeared which might indicate 
whether they qualify as professional or major trade publications or other major media. Also, the online 
evidence consists only of English translations with webpage links, with no copy of the original text 
submitted. We can therefore not meaningfully determine whether the translations are accurate and 
credible. 
In addition, the Petitioner initially submitted English language translations of transcripts labelled 
"Video l" through "Video 4," as well as links to vide~..u..u.----'-'u..u...L..W ....... ....LLl---""-J..U.1,,"-'--'CL....U..u..u. ........ ..,__..u..wL.....U.l"'---'-1' 
interviewed briefl and mentions his com etition in the 
the 2008 and the ,.__------,----,-------' 
...._ ______ __, __ ___,.__.However, these transcripts were not initially accompanied by evidence 
of the source of these transcripts. In responding to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner submitted 
screenshots for videos which show him appearing on a television show called "Vitamin Club" and on 
the "Shant TV" network. We must first note that it is not apparent which translation relates to which 
video, as this evidence was not submitted together and is not sufficiently labelled. In addition, the 
Petitioner submitted brief articles describing Shant TV and Vitamin Club from Wikipedia. As there 
are no assurances about the reliability of the content from this open, user-edited Internet site, 
information from Wikipedia will be accorded no evidentiary weight. See Laamilem Badasa v. Michael 
Mukasey, 540 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 2008). 2 Further, even if we were to give weight to the content of 
these articles, it is insufficient to establish that either medium qualifies as professional or major trade 
media or other major media. As such, we find that the evidence does not establish that the Petitioner 
meets this criterion. 
2 See also the online content from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: General_disclaimer, accessed on May 13, 
2019, and copy incorporated into the record of proceeding is subject to the following general disclaimer: 
WTKTPEDTA MAKES NO GUARANTEE 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 strncture 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 ... 
. Wikipedia 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. 
5 
Matter of E-G-
Evidence of the individual's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge 
of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which 
class[fication is sought. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) 
The Petitioner submitted two letters from I O , I which relate to this criterion, one typed in 
English and dated May 7, 2018, and another translated from Armenian but not dated. In the dated 
letter, he states that the Petitioner "was elected by the Federation's Referee Committees to serve as a 
referee during numerous competitions" in Armenia. He states in the dated letter that the Petitioner 
participated in referee training courses from 2013-17, receiving a "Judge-B" degree in 2016 and 
"Judge-A" degree in 2017. He also indicates that the Petitioner served as an "edge judge" for junior 
competitions in 2015, and as a judge at a tournament i~ I Georgia. 
However, neither letter describes the duties of a referee to demonstrate whether they involve 
evaluating or judging the work or skills of competitors as opposed to enforcing the rules of a match 
and ensuring sportsmanlike competition. Moreover, the record lacks other evidence, such as official 
competition rules for the tournaments listed in the letter, showing that serving as a "referee" in this 
instance equates to participating as a 'judge" of the work of others. Without further documentation, 
such as evidence that he awarded points or exercised his judgment in choosing the ultimate winner, 
evidence regarding officiating at a match is insufficient to meet this criterion. 
Evidence of the individual's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business­
related contributions of major sign[ficance 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. For 
example, a Petitioner may show that the contributions have been widely implemented throughout the 
field, have remarkably impacted or influenced the field, or have otherwise risen to a level of major 
significance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that his training of karate students, who then went on to have success 
in competitions, establishes his qualification under this criterion. The record includes letters from 
three martial arts associations in Armenia which indicate that he conducted seminars with them in 
2015, 2016 and 2017. In addition, two letters were submitted from members ofthec::]who indicate 
that the Petitioner trained them, and both indicate that he "was presented as my coach" at the I I I !Karate Championship in 2015 and that they received medals at this event, as well as others. 
We must first note that these letters are not accompanied by verifiable evidence that the writers 
received the awards they claim, as the record contains only photographs of unidentified individuals 
holding certificates. In addition, the Petitioner has not submitted any evidence relating to his training 
or qualification as a karate coach. Most importantly, the evidence is insufficient to establish that, even 
if the Petitioner served as coach for these two athletes who have had success at the national level, this 
activity is an original contribution of major significance to the field of karate. 
6 
Matter of E-G-
The Petitioner also asserts that the evidence of his publication of two karate manuals serves to show 
an original contribution to the field. As discussed in more detail under the criterion below, the 
evidence regarding these manuals is incomplete, including a letter which states that 3000 copies of 
these manuals were published. While a letter from Mr. I O • I indicates that they are used by the 
.......... -------------------~ of Armenia in its trainings, as well as by other 
martial arts federations in Armenia, the evidence is insufficient to establish that they are original 
contributions by the Petitioner, and that they have made an impact to the sport of karate to the level of 
major significance. I O .1 l :issertions regarding the activities of other martial arts groups in 
Armenia are not supported by evidence from those groups, or other documentary evidence. Therefore, 
upon review of the evidence regarding the Petitioner's work as a trainer and as an author of karate 
instructional manuals, we do not find that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or 
major trade publications or other major media. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi) 
Evidence of the Petitioner's authorship of two manuals was submitted] titled 
~--------~ and J~---~---~--~--~- In general, a scholarly article 
should be written for learned persons in that field, which include those having a profound knowledge 
in a field. 3 A partially translated letter from l I LLC" was submitted which states that they are 
"intended for karate trainers, as well as for the wide range of public." However, the title of the person 
signing the letter is not provided in the translation, and the record does not include information about 
this company and its relationship to the issuance of these manuals. Also,I I writes in his 
letter dated August 20, 2018 that the first of these manuals "is on the basic techniques required to be 
developed by martial art athlete," and the second is an "informational guide for referees." These 
descriptions indicate that the manuals provide information for beginning athletes and referees in the 
field of martial arts, not advanced, scholarly information for those with a profound knowledge in the 
field. Further, the record does not include the contents of these manuals, or English translations of 
that content, which would be probative as to whether they can be considered to be scholarly in nature. 
Therefore, the record does not sufficiently establish that the Petitioner meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the individual has performed in a leading or critical role for 
organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(viii) 
The Petitioner asserts that his membership on the Armenian national karate team, and his 
representation of Armenia at various international competitions, shows that he meets this criterion, but 
he does not clarify whether he claims a leading or critical role for the national team. We note that 
being a member of a national team does not, by itself: sufficiently demonstrate a critical role. Instead, 
the Petitioner must show how his performance was considered essential to the team's overall 
performance. In general, a critical role is commonly one in which a petitioner was responsible for the 
success or standing of the organization or establishment. Here, the Petitioner has not submitted 
evidence to show how his contribution to the national team was critical to any success it may have 
3 See USCIS Adjudicator's Field Manual, Chapter 22.2(i)(l )(A) https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/ocomm/ilink/0-
0-0-6423 .html#0-0-0-417 
7 
Matter of E-G-
enjoyed. In addition, the Petitioner has not asserted that he has played a leading role within the 
hierarchy of the Armenian national team, or the J I. 
We further note that the Petitioner has not established that the Armenian national karate team enjoys 
a distinguished reputation. Accordingly, we find that the Petitioner has not established that he meets 
this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As detailed above, the evidence does not establish that the Petitioner received a major, internationally 
recognized award or meets three of the ten evidentiary criteria. As a result, we need not provide the 
type of final merits analysis determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, 
we advise that we have reviewed the record in its entirety, and conclude that it does not support a 
finding that the Petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification 
sought. For these reasons, the Petitioner has not shown that he qualifies for classification as an 
individual of extraordinary ability. 
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 ofE-G-, ID# 3121110 (AAO May 14, 2019) 
8