dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 24323456 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB . 15, 2023 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner , a sombo and judo champion , seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary 
ability . See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(1 )(A), 8 U.S .C. 
§ 1153(b)(l)(A) . This first preference clas sification 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 the Petitioner met the initial evidence requirements for the classification by establishing his 
receipt of a major , internationally recognized award or by meeting three of the ten evidentiary criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence . 
Matter ofChawathe , 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 , 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to individuals with 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; who seek to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability ; and whose 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 at 8 C.F.R . § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis . First, a petitioner 
can demon strate international 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 criteria 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. 
Where a petitioner meets the initial evidence requirements through either a one-time achievement or 
meeting three lesser criteria, 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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner competes in the two martial arts disciplines of sombo wrestling and judo. The Petitioner 
outlined his achievements to include, in part, winning the I lat the World Sombo Championship 
in and obtaining! in the Judo International Tournament in The Petitioner stated 
that he accomplished numerous achievements in his field of expertise which have been recognized on 
both a national and international level. Because the Petitioner has not indicated or shown that he 
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). The Petitioner claims to have satisfied three of 
these criteria, summarized below: 
• (i), documentation of the individual's receipt oflesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor 
• (ii), membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements of their members 
• (iii), published material about the individual in professional or major media 
The Director concluded the Petitioner met two of the criteria, pertaining to the receipt of lesser 
nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor and 
for published material about the Petitioner in professional or major media. On appeal, the Petitioner 
asserts that his evidence satisfies the applicable legal requirements to satisfy the other claimed criteria. 
We will not disturb the Director's determinations regarding the two criteria that the Petitioner met. 
But for the reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not satisfied 
the other claimed criterion. 
A. Evidentiary 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) 
The Petitioner claimed membership in three organizations. After reviewing the Petitioner's material, 
the Director determined that he did not meet the requirements of this criterion because he did not 
establish that the organizations required outstanding achievements as a condition of membership. 
Within the appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the memberships he has attained qualify under this 
criterion. 
2 
This criterion contains several evidentiary elements the Petitioner must satisfy. First, the Petitioner 
must demonstrate that he is a member of an association in his field. Second, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate both of the following: (1) the associations utilize nationally or internationally recognized 
experts to judge the achievements of prospective members to determine if the achievements are 
outstanding, and (2) the associations use this outstanding determination as a condition of eligibility 
for prospective membership. 
First, we consider the International Judo Federation (IJF). The Petitioner submitted a copy of his 
official IJF identification card, which states the "bearer of this Identification Card is authorized to 
participate in all UF organized events during its validity." The Petitioner also presented a printout 
from IJF' s website listing the Petitioner as an active judo world circuit judoka. Further, the Petitioner 
submitted evidence of how countries can become members of the IJF and statutory provisions for the 
IJF member national federations. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the IJF is an International Olympic Committee recognized 
official International Federation for Judo and is responsible for the integrity of their sport on the 
international level. While we acknowledge that the IJF is an international association, the Petitioner 
did not provide sufficient evidence regarding the eligibility requirements for becoming a member of 
the IJF. Although the Petitioner provided some information regarding the federations' membership, 
it is not clear how members are eligible to join. The submitted documentation does not show that IJF 
utilized national or international recognized experts to judge the achievement of prospective members 
to determine if the achievements were outstanding. Also lacking was an indication that IJF used this 
outstanding determination as a condition of eligibility for membership. Each of these are mandatory 
requirements within the regulation. 
The Petitioner also provided a copy of his membership card from USA Judo. However, the Petitioner 
did not provide any evidence of the eligibility requirements to become a member of USA Judo. The 
record does not contain sufficient evidence to support the claim that USA Judo requires outstanding 
achievements of its members, as judged by recognized national or international experts. 
The Petitioner further provided a copy of his membership cards from the Republic of Moldova 
I titling him as an I I ___________ 
I The Petitioner also submitted a letter from the State Secretary of the The Petitioner lof the Republic of Moldova confirming that the Petitioner of was granted these titles. In addition, the state secretary indicated the "Unique Sports Classification of 
the Republic of Moldova is a statutory document in the domain of physical training and sports, which 
states requirements and regulations necessary for conferral of sportive titles and categories in the 
Republic of Moldova, as well as conditions for their fulfilment." The letter lists the Moldovan statutes 
for granting these titles to an individual. On appeal, the Petitioner claims that Moldova has a statutory 
requirement to obtain these titles and an individual cannot pay a fee or win an event to obtain this 
distinction. However, the Petitioner did not provide a copy of the statutes outlining these titles' 
eligibility requirements, or any other corroborating evidence regarding the eligibility requirements to 
obtain these titles. Absent from the evidence is a showing that the Republic of Moldova! I I !utilized nationally or internationally recognized experts to judge the achievements 
of prospective members to determine if the achievements were outstanding, and an indication that it 
this outstanding determination as a condition of eligibility for membership. It is insufficient to allege 
3 
eligibility through conclusory assertions that are not supported by sufficient evidence, which proves 
the allegation. 1 
On appeal the Petitioner does not explain how any of the organizations require outstanding 
achievements as one of the minimum requirements for membership. For the reasons stated above, the 
Petitioner has not established eligibility under 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 lesser criteria. We also need not provide the type of final 
merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20, or render a determination on the 
issue of whether the Petitioner's entry will substantially benefit prospectively the United States. 
Accordingly, we reserve these issues. 2 
Nevertheless, we have reviewed the record in the aggregate and concluded that it does not support a 
conclusion that the Petitioner 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. Price, 20 I&N Dec. 
at 954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994) ( concluding that even major league level athletes do not automatically 
meet the statutory standards for classification as an individual of "extraordinary ability,"); Visinscaia, 
4 F. Supp. 3d at 131 (internal quotation marks omitted) (finding that the extraordinary ability 
designation is "extremely restrictive by design,"); Hamal v. Dep 't of Homeland Sec. (Hamal//), No. 
19-cv-2534, 2021 WL 2338316, at *5 (D.D.C. June 8, 2021) (determining that EB-1 visas are 
"reserved for a very small percentage of prospective immigrants"). See also Hamal v. Dep 't of 
Homeland Sec. (Hamal I), No. 19-cv-2534, 2020 WL 2934954, at * 1 (D.D.C. June 3, 2020) ( citing 
Kazarian, 596 at 1122 (upholding denial of petition of a published theoretical physicist specializing 
in non-Einsteinian theories of gravitation) (stating that "[c]ourts have found that even highly 
accomplished individuals fail to win this designation")); Lee v. Ziglar, 237 F. Supp. 2d 914,918 (N.D. 
Ill. 2002) (finding that "arguably one of the most famous baseball players in Korean history" did not 
qualify for visa as a baseball coach). Here, the Petitioner has not shown that the significance of his 
work 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 )(1 )(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). The record does not contain sufficient evidence 
establishing that he is among the upper echelon in his field. 
1 Matter of Ho, 22 T&N Dec. 206, 213 (Assoc. Comm'r 1998); Fano v. O'Neill, 806 F.2d 1262, 1266 (5th Cir. 1987); I 756, 
Inc. v. Att'y Gen, 745 F. Supp. 9, 17 (D.D.C. 1990). 
2 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516, n.7 
( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
4 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated his eligibility 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5