dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Department of IIon~eland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwammtd 
invasion of pew& ptv&r 
PUBLIC COPY 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
IN RE: 
EAC 06 061 50739 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
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. 
 1153(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. 
u 
%obert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (MO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner, a martial arts school that operates several gyms, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an 
employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 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 qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter of support from f McLean, Virginia, a taekwondo master 
and President of the Jhoon Rhee Foundation, discussing the significance of the beneficiary's athletic 
achievements. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Pnority 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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) 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. 5 204.5(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 December 19, 2005, seeks to classify the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary 
ability as a martial arts instructor and taekwondo competitor. At the time of filing, the beneficiary was 
working for. in Virginia. A December 13, 2005 letter from counsel states: "The Petitioner 
desires to hire the Alien Beneficiary for his expertise and services in events that involve the martial art 
Taekwondo; to instruct students of various age groups and skill levels and participate in tournaments and 
demonstrations."' 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(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). In his December 13, 2005 letter accompanying the petition, counsel argues that the beneficiary's first 
place Gold Medal in Sparring at the 14"' Annual U.S. Open Taekwondo Championships in 2005 and his first 
place victory at the National Championship for selecting representatives of the Korean National Team in 1997 
qualify as "major, internationally recognized awards." 
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. Given that the House Report specifically cited to the Nobel Prize as an example of a 
one-time achievement, examples of one-time awards which enjoy major, international recognition may 
include the Pulitzer Prize, the Academy Award, and (most relevant for athletics) an Olympic Medal. 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. 5 204.5(h)(3). Significantly, even a lesser internationally 
recognized award could serve to meet only one of the ten regulatory criteria, of which an alien must meet at least 
three. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(i). 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. 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 alien's field as one of the 
top awards in th 
The letter from states: 
The U.S. Open Tae Kwon Do Championships are the most prestigious international event held in the 
U.S. each year, second only in distinction to Olympics and University Games events. Despite the 
title, "U.S.," the event is international in its nature and is regularly attended by top competitors from 
15-20 nations. Placing a gold medal at [a] U.S. Open event is by no means an insignificant 
achievement. The second most notable achievement I see on [the beneficiary's] resume is the gold 
medal he earned in 1997 Selection Round for Korean National Representative. This event is a 
national precursor to major international event, such as Asian Games, Olympics or the like. Winning 
(or being selected) a Korean national representative is quite an honor, as most medals in Tae Kwon 
Do is [sic] still being won by Koreans, who invented and developed the martial art. 
' The record reflects that the petitioner has competed as recently as March 2005 at the 14'~ Annual U.S. Open 
Taekwondo Championships in Atlanta, Georgia. 
states that the U.S. Open Taekwondo Championships "is international in its nature and is 
regularly attended by top competitors from 15-20 nations," but the record contains no documentary evidence 
to support his assertion. There is no evidence establishing the international significance and magnitude of this 
competition. For example, there is no evidence that the awardees received international media attention in the 
general or martial arts sports media of multiple countries worldwide. Nor is there evidence establishing 
connection to the 2005 U.S. open Taekwondo Championships. 
 Simply going on record 
without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in 
these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of 
California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). CIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions 
statements submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 
(Commr. 1988). However, CIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an 
alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is 
not presumptive evidence of eligibility; CIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they 
support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. CIS may even give less weight to an opinion that is not 
corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way questionable. Id. at 795; See also Matter of 
Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. at 158, 165 (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. at 190). Even if 
the petitioner were to submit objective documentary evidence corroborating statement, he 
indicates that the level of distinction associated with the U.S. Open Taekwondo Championships is secondary 
to that of events such as the "Olympics and University Games." We cannot ignore that the plain language of 
the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) qualifies the phrase "international recognized award" with the 
limitation "major." Without evidence distinguishing the level of acclaim associated with earning a gold 
medal at the U.S. Open fiom that of other international taekwondo competitions, we cannot conclude the 
beneficiary satisfies the regulation. 
With regard to the beneficiary's first place at the 1997 National Championship for selecting representatives of 
the Korean National Team, Jhoon Rhee describes this event as a "national" taekwondo competition limited to 
Koreans. The documentation submitted by the petitioner reflects that this competition is a national 
competition rather than an international competition such as the Olympics or the Taekwondo World 
Championships. Clearly an award with a geographically restricted pool of competitors cannot serve as a 
major, international prize on the level of an Olympic medal or a comparable major internationally recognized 
award in the martial arts. As the plain language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(h)(3) requires a "major, 
international recognized award," we cannot conclude that the beneficiary's involvement in a competition 
limited to only Korean participants satisfies the regulation. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary is the recipient of a major, 
internationally recognized award. While beneficiary's first place victories at the 1997 Korean National 
Championship and the 2005 U.S. Open Taekwondo Championships are evidence of national recognition in 
his sport, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary's awards from these competitions are evidence 
of "major, international" recognition as required by the regulation. 
Barring the alien's receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
$ 204.5(h)(3) 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 an alien'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(h)(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. 5 204.5(h)(2). The 
petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Documentation ofthe alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or 
awards for excellence in theJield of endeavor. 
As discussed previously, the petitioner submitted evidence showing, inter alia, that the beneficiary won first 
place awards at the 2005 U.S. Open Taekwondo Championships and the 1997 National Championship for 
selecting representatives of the Korean National Team. As such, we find that the beneficiary meets this 
criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classification 
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 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 submitted a July 12, 2002 certificate from the Korea Taekwondo Association (KTA) stating that 
the beneficiary attained "4'h Dan." While the beneficiary passed "a test conducted in accordance with the rules 
and regulations" and achieved a 4d' level Dan, there is no evidence that the KTA requires a 4'h level Dan to 
become a member.2 Further, there is no evidence identifying the specific requirements that must be satisfied to 
achieve this ranking. 
The petitioner also submitted a March 4, 2004 "Award of Commendation" presented to the beneficiary by the 
Maryland Tae Kwon Do Association (MTA) and a May 9, 2004 recommendation letter from the Virginia 
State Taekwondo Association (VSTA) endorsing the 0-1 nonimmigrant visa petition filed in the beneficiary's 
behalf. In his December 13, 2005 letter accompanying the petition, counsel asserts that the preceding 
documents are evidence of the beneficiary's membership in the MTA and the VSTA. Neither of these 
documents, however, specifically state that the beneficiary holds "membership" in the MTA or VSTA. 
Without documentary evidence to support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's 
burden of proof. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 
I&N Dec. 533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 
There is no evidence that first, second, and third level Dans are excluded from membership in the KTA. 
17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). The record includes no evidence identifying the beneficiary as a member 
of the MTA or VSTA. 
In this case, there is no evidence (such as membership bylaws or official admission requirements) showing 
that the KTA, the MTA, or the VSTA require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by 
recognized national or international experts in the beneficiary's field or an allied one. As such, the petitioner 
has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other rnajor 
media, relating to the alien ls work in thejield for which classijication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessav translation. 
In general, in order for published material to meet ths 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 from a local publication or from a publication not published in a country's 
predominant language. 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.3 
The petitioner submitted material about the beneficiary which counsel states "appeared in the January 1997 issue 
of Taekwondo[,] a magazine published by the Korean Taekwondo Association." This material states that the 
beneficiary earned gold at the "'97 National Representative Championship." According to the beneficiary's 
"Certificate of Achievement" and 1" Place certificate from the KTA for this event, he won the 1997 National 
Representative Championship on February 14, 1997. Therefore, counsel's claim that the preceding material 
about the beneficiary was published in "January 1997" is incorrect. The preceding material did not include the 
author's name or the correct date of publication as required by the plain language of this criterion. Further, there 
is no evidence (such as circulation statistics) showing that Taekwondo qualifies as a professional or major trade 
publication or other form of major media. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a July 18, 2005 article in The Korea 
Daily entitled "Let's Go, Win!," but this article mentions several individuals and is not primarily about the 
beneficiary. Further, the author of the material was not identified and there is no evidence showing that this 
publication qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or other form of major media. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has pe$orrned in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
3 
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. 
In order to establish that the beneficiary performed a leading or critical role for an organization or 
establishment with a distinguished reputation, the petitioner must establish the nature of the beneficiary's role 
within the entire organization or establishment and the reputation of the organization or establishment. 
The petitioner submitted a letter fro , Master Sergeant, Korean Marine Corps 2Ild ~ivision, 
stating: "[The beneficiary], a lieutenant reserve, worked as a Taekwondo trainer from March 2000 to January 
2002. He worked as the coach to the Taekwondo Team of the 2nd Division, Korean Marine Corps enabling 
the Team to achieve excellent results that year." The record, however, includes no documentary evidence of 
the team's competitive results. 
The petitioner also submitted a May 20, 2004 letter from 
 Head Master, Ma Song Tae 
Kwon Do Academy, Korea, stating: 
[The beneficiary] began teaching from June 2002 to present as a full time Master Instructor . . . . 
During this time, he assisted me and prepared class materials. He is good at handing children and 
nice to all students. He taught competition team members of my studio to participate [sic] national 
championship and local championships. He taught student with enthusiasm and made very [sic] 
effort to convey some knowledge of Taekwondo. 
The record, however, includes no documentary evidence of the team members' results from these 
championships. With regard to the taekwondo students taught by the beneficiary, there is no evidence that 
any individuals or teams under his direct tutelage distinguished themselves nationally or internationally. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a September 5, 2006 letter from 
- President, Tiger Den, Inc., stating: "Tiger Den, Inc. has employed [the beneficiary] since April 
2003 to the present as a Martial Arts (Taekwondo) Instructor and Athlete. [The beneficiary] works full-time, 
40-hours, five days per week. . . . We are satisfied with [the beneficiary's] job performance . . . and we wish 
to continue his employment. . . ." 
The petitioner submitted promotional material (such as brochures) for Tiger Den, Inc., but this self-serving 
material is not adequate to demonstrate that its martial arts school has a distinguished reputation. For 
example, the record includes no official competitive records from USA Taekwondo or other evidence 
establishing that Tiger Den's students have distinguished themselves through winning national or 
international championships. Nor is there evidence showing that the other organizations for which the 
beneficiary has worked have distinguished reputations. The record also lacks evidence demonstrating how the 
beneficiary's role differentiated him from the other instructors employed by the above organizations. As 
such, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary was responsible for his employers' success or 
standing to a degree consistent with the meaning of "leading or critical role" and indicative of sustained national 
or international acclaim. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other signiJicantly high remuneration 
for services, in relation to others in thef'ield. 
Page 8 
The record includes the beneficiary's income tax forms reflecting earnings'of $30,900 in 2005, $6,600 in 2004, 
and $17,651 in 2003. In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a letter from 
stating that the beneficiary "receives a pre-determined salary of $30,000 per year." The plain 
language of this regulatory criterion requires the petitioner to submit evidence that the beneficiary has 
commanded a high salary "in relation to others in the field." The petitioner offers no basis for comparison 
showing that the beneficiary's compensation was significantly high in relation to others in his field. There is no 
indication that the beneficiary has earned a level of compensation that places him among the highest paid martial 
arts instructors or taekwondo athletes in the United States or any other country. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate the beneficiary's receipt of a major, internationally 
recognized award, or that he meets at least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
While CIS has approved an 0-1 nonimmigrant visa petition filed on behalf of the beneficiary, that prior approval 
does not preclude CIS from denylng 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 CIS approves prior nonimmigrant 
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. Sava, 724 F. Supp. 1103 (E.D.N.Y. 
1989). 
The MO is not required to approve applications or petitions where eligbility 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 CIS or any agency must treat 
acknowledged errors as binding precedent. Sussex Engg. Ltd. v. Montgomely, 825 F.2d 1084, 1090 (6th Cir. 
1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1008 (1988). 
Furthermore, the MO'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 nonimmigrant petition on behalf of 
the beneficiary, the MO 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 himself to such an extent that he 
may be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within the small percentage 
at the very top of his field. The evidence is not persuasive that the beneficiary's achievements set him 
significantly above almost all others in his 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. tj 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.