dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF B-N-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 25, 2019 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a martial artist and martial arts instructor, seeks classification as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. 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. 
Following the Petitioner's timely response to the Director of the Nebraska Service Center's request 
for evidence, the Director denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, concluding 
that the Petitioner had satisfied only one of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of which he must meet 
at least three. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and asserts that he meets at least three of the ten criteria. 
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 B-N-
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 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that he has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, he must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). In denying the petition, the Director found that the Petitioner met only the 
criterion for judging at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv). The record contains evidence that the Petitioner 
served as a judge for numerous martial arts events in Uzbekistan. Accordingly, we agree with the 
Director that the Petitioner meets the judging criterion. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that he meets five additional criteria, discussed below. We have 
reviewed all of the evidence in the record and conclude that it does not support a finding that he 
satisfies the requirements of at least three criteria. 
A. Regulatory 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). 
The Director acknowledged the Beneficiary's receipt of multiple awards at martial arts competitions, 
but found that the record did not demonstrate that the awards are nationally or internationally 
2 
Matter of B-N-
recognized. Specifically, he stated that, as these awards were "limited to members of that association 
and participants of that competition ... such evidence has no probative value for meeting this criterion." 
As noted by the Director, the record reflects that the Petitioner has received numerous awards for 
martial arts competitions. The Petitioner establishes that in 2009 he received a bronze medal inl I 
c=]at the I I Martial Arts Games inl I Thailand. The record reflects that these games 
were hosted by the Olympic Council of Asia and that the attendees were National Olympic 
Committees from numerous countries. We find the record sufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner 
has won an award that is nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in martial arts. 1 
Accordingly, we disagree with the Director and find that the Petitioner meets this 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 satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner must show that he is a member of an association in his 
field, and that membership in the association is based on being judged by recognized national or 
international experts as having outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is 
sought. 2 The Director concluded that the Petitioner did not meet this criterion, finding first that 
Petitioner's membership on the Uzbekistan National! I Team "does not pertain" to this criterion. 
He farther determined that, while the record included letters confirming the Petitioner's membership 
in several martial arts federations, 3 it lacked evidence establishing that these associations required 
outstanding achievements of their members as judged by recognized experts in martial arts. 
On appeal, the Petitioner references both the correspondence mentioned by the Director, and the 
statutes and rules for these associations provided in the record, and reiterates that this documentation 
establishes that he meets this criterion. He also includes an August 2018 letter froml I 
president of the All-American I !Federation I I, confirming his membership in that 
organization. 
Regarding the documentation pertaining to statutes and rules, the record, in relevant part, contains the 
constitution of thel 14 While this federation extends membership to individuals, its constitution 
does not provide the requirements to join and the record lacks other materials demonstrating the 
1 We note that we have reviewed the record in its entirety, and find that that the evidence regarding the remaining awards 
does not sufficiently establish their national or international recognition. 
2 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form 1-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2. AFM Update ADJ 1-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html (providing an example of admission to membership in 
the National Academy of Sciences as a Foreign Associate that requires individuals to be nominated by an academy 
member, and membership is ultimately granted based upon recognition of the individual's distinguished achievements in 
original research). 
3 We note that letters in the record related to these organizations confirm the Petitioner's membership on national teams, 
rather than in the organization themselves. 
4 The record also contains the statutes of the Federation Internationale del land the articles of association of the 
Federation International Amateur I ~ However, the Petitioner does not claim membership in these organizations 
and so, while we have reviewed these documents, we do not discuss them here. 
3 
Matter of B-N-
process by which the Petitioner was selected to be a member of this organization. Absent this 
information, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his membership in I I is based upon 
outstanding achievements as judged by national or international experts in the field of martial arts. 
The Petitioner also provides correspondence froml l president of the International 
I !Association's I I branch, and I I president of the 
Amateur and Professional! I Federation, stating that he is a member of the Uzbek National 
I !Team and the Uzbek National! !Team, respectively. Both authors indicate 
that the criteria for granting membership on these teams are the Petitioner's outstanding achievements 
in each discipline, as judged by nationally or internationally recognized experts. However, the 
language in these letters is identical, calling into question whether they were independently prepared 
by the authors, and therefore diminishing their probative value in establishing that the Petitioner's 
membership on these teams qualify for this criterion. Moreover, repeating the language of the statute 
or regulations does not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof Fedin Bros. Co., Ltd. v. Sava, 724 F. 
Supp. 1103, 1108 (E.D.N.Y. 1989), ajfd, 905 F. 2d 41 (2d. Cir. 1990); Avyr Associates, Inc. v. 
Meissner, 1997 WL 188942 at *5 (S.D.N.Y.). Regardless, the letters do not contain detailed, probative 
information that identify the requirements for membership on these teams, or demonstrate that 
membership is based upon outstanding achievements in the field of martial arts as determined by 
national or international experts. 
As noted above, on appeal the Petitioner provides an additional letter on appeal froml I I I president of the Uzbekistan! I Federation, confirming his membership on the 
Uzbekistan National! I Team and stating that his admission to this team was recommended by 
athletes who are experts in the field of martial arts. The record includes correspondence from each of 
these athletes in which they attribute their recommendation to the Petitioner's having been "a 
champion ... and winner many times in national and international tournaments." However, the 
correspondence does not contain detailed information identifying the membership requirements for 
this team, or otherwise demonstrating that membership on this team is based on outstanding 
achievements. In addition, while the Petitioner provided the accomplishments of the individuals who 
wrote these letters, he did not demonstrate that they are recognized national or international experts 
consistent with this regulatory criterion. We also note that the letters are written using identical 
language and this diminishes their probative value, as discussed above. 
For these reasons, the Petitioner has not established that he meets the criterion for membership. 
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 
necessary translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner had not met this criterion as he "submitted no independent, 
probative evidence" that the articles about the petitioner related to his work "are in major trade 
publications or other major media." On appeal, the Petitioner does not contest the Director's finding, 
instead referencing the articles previously provided and asserting that they are "numerous and 
persuading." While the record includes articles in The World of News, Vatanparvar, The Army of the 
4 
Matter of B-N-
Uzbekistan, and Eastern Pravda about the Petitioner and related to his work that include the title, date, 
and author, it does not establish that these publications qualify as major media, as required. 5 
With respect to The World of News, the Petitioner includes a translated screenshot from the webpage 
https://mimov.ru/pr-promotion.html titled "PR and Promotion," and a second document 'The World 
of News -weekly newspaper." The former does not contain information, such as circulation statistics 
or other relevant data, which might demonstrate that The World of News rises to the level of major 
media. While the latter contains this data, the Petitioner does not demonstrate that its circulation is 
high relative to that of similar publications, and thus that it rises to the level of a major medium. 6 
The Petitioner also includes a webpage printout describing Vatanparvar, but lacking circulation 
statistics or other relevant data. In addition, the record includes an article published in The Army of 
the Uzbekistan, but the Petitioner does not provide information about this magazine. He therefore has 
not demonstrated that either publication rises to the level of major medium. 
As it relates to the newspaper Eastern Pravda, the Petitioner submits an article published therein titled 
~------------~" 7 The Petitioner provides no additional information, such as 
circulation statistics or other relevant data, about Eastern Pravda or shown that its circulation is high 
relative to that of similar publications. Absent this information, the Petitioner has not established that 
Eastern Pravda is a major medium. 
We note that the Petitioner subsequently included a properly translated statement regarding a 
newspaper named The Truth of the East that contains its circulation statistics. His intent was to 
demonstrate that the material in the initial petition "was published in major, nationally established 
media in [his] country of origin." 8 However, the Petitioner does not explain the relationship between 
The Truth of the East and any of the publications discussed above or identify articles in the record 
published therein. Even had he done so, the Petitioner does not submit additional evidence 
demonstrating that the newspaper's circulation statistics are high relative to that of similar media. 
Accordingly, he has not demonstrated that it rises to the level of a major medium. 
For these reasons, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he meets the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
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). 
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 
5 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005 .1, supra, at 7. 
6 Id. 
7 The coversheet preceding this article in the initial filing provided this information. 
8 The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking for, among other things, additional materials demonstrating that 
the aiticles in the record were published in major media. In the brief accompanying his response to this RFE, the Petitioner 
indicates that this documentation was intended for this purpose. 
5 
Matter of B-N-
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 in the field. 
Here the Petitioner asserts that he meets this criterion through his "original method of martial arts 
cross-training" that is "uniquely effective" and provides multiple letters ofrecommendation describing 
this method. 9 For example, one letter written byl I states that "[ the Petitioner] developed 
a uniquely-effective and highly-original method for cross-training martial arts disciplines" and that 
this method "has been recognized by national and international experts in martial arts to be a 
contribution of major significance." In a second recommendation letter, .__ _____ ......... __.from 
I I notes that the Petitioner has used this training method in his role as the coach at II 
:=:=.===:::;--~Sports Club) resulting in success for both himself and the I I sports te~ 
I I explains that it is because of this success that the method is "considered by national and 
international experts in martial arts to be an original contribution of major significance to the field." 
However, neither letter provides specific details about how the Petitioner's training methods are 
original when compared with traditional martial arts training, nor do they describe how his techniques 
have been applied or implemented in the broader field beyond the athletes he has coached. 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. 
Kazarian, 580 F.3d at 1036, aff'd in part 596 F.3d at 1115. For this reason, the Petitioner has not met 
his burden of showing that he has made original contributions of major significance in the field. 
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). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he meets this criterion but does not identify or submit evidence 
supporting this claim. Accordingly, we find that he has not demonstrated that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien 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). 
As it relates to a leading role, the evidence must establish that a petitioner is or was a leader. A title, 
with appropriate matching duties, can help to establish if a role is or was, in fact, leading. 10 Regarding 
a critical role, the evidence must demonstrate that a petitioner has contributed in a way that is of 
significant importance to the outcome of the organization or establishment's activities. It is not the 
title of a petitioner's role, but rather the performance in the role that determines whether the role is or 
was critical. 11 
As noted above, the record reflects that the Petitioner served as the head coach of the I I 
Sports Club martial arts team. It also contains a reference letter from thel I 
indicating that he served as the head of the sports center for thel I Sports Club. While 
9 Although we discuss only a sampling of these letters, we have reviewed all correspondence in the record. 
10 USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 10. 
11 Id. 
6 
Matter of B-N-
this demonstrates that Petitioner has served in a leading role for these organizations, the record lacks 
evidence demonstrating that either organization has a distinguished reputation, as required. Therefore, 
he has not met his burden in demonstrating that he meets the requirements of this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, we need not provide the type of final 
merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise that we 
have reviewed the record in the aggregate, concluding that it does not support a finding that the he has 
established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than those progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held that even 
athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the statutory standards for 
classification as an individual of "extraordinary ability." Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953, 954 
(Assoc. Comm'r 1994). While the Petitioner need not establish that there is no one more accomplished 
to qualify for the classification sought, we find the record insufficient to demonstrate that he has 
sustained national or international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the top of his field. 
See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not established his eligibility for the classification 
sought. In visa petition proceedings, the petitioner bears the 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 B-N-, ID# 04364477 (AAO Oct. 25, 2019) 
7