dismissed EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

PUBLIC CORY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
'2 g 
Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: MAR 1 9 2009 
LIN 06 246 52416 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationaiity Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
V 
F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska 
Service Center and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will 
be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1 153(b)(l)(A), as an alien 
of extraordinary ability in athletics. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the 
sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualifL for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
9 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority 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 recogmzed 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. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 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. tj 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. 204.5(h)(3). The relevant 
criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that 
she has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on August 21, 2006, seeks to classifjr the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary 
ability in the martial arts. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can 
Page 3 
establish sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the 
regulation 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 eligibility for this classification merely by submitting evidence that simply relates to 
at least three criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). In determining whether the petitioner 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 of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted the following: 
1. Wushu Dan Certificate stating that the petitioner "passed the Wushu Dan Examination" 
and achieved -5). 
2. Honorary Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 in the event of Eight 
Diagram Palm of female adult at the second special item competition held by Eight 
Diagram Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association" (October 6,2002). 
3. The Honorary Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 in the event of 
Apparatus of female adult at the second special item competition held by Eight Diagram 
Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association" (October 6,2002). 
4. Certificate stating that the petitioner won ' in event of Dual Tomahawk of 
female young group at Beijing First 'Shuyiyuan' Cup Traditional Eight Diagram Palm 
Invitational Tournament" (October 200 1 .) 
5. Certificate stating that the petitioner won ' at the event of Dual Apparatus in 
group of C female at the 5th International Wushu Invitational Tournament" (August 10, 
2004). 
6. Achievement Certificate stating that the petitioner won " in the "Female 
Group C Other Quanshu" event at the "First World Traditional Wushu Festival" (October 
2004). 
7. Achievement Certificate stating that the petitioner won '" in the "Female 
Group C Other Double Apparatus" event at the at the "First World Traditional Wushu 
Festival" (October 2004). 
8. Certificate of Performance stating that the petitioner won the ' of Eight 
Diagram Palm in female groups B, C, D at the National Traditional Wushu Exchange 
Competition (August 8,2004). 
' The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this decision. 
9. Certificate of Performance stating that the petitioner won the ' of Other 
Apparatus in female groups D" at the National Traditional Wushu Exchange Competition 
(August 8,2004). 
10. Certificate stating that the petitioner won in the Taiji Apparatus at the First 
World Taijiquan Health Conference (March 22-26,2001). 
11. Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 at the event of Traditional Chen 
Style Taiji Quan in group of female at the 5th International Wushu Invitational 
Tournament" (August 10,2004). 
12. Certificate stating that the 
 Kungfu  aster 
to study the form of 
13. Certificate stating that the 
 Kungfu Master" to 
study 
14. Certificate stating that the petitioner won " at the event of Chen-style 
shadowboxing in female youth group in 2006 Beijing . . . hen Zhaokui Cup' 
Wushu & Shadowboxing Competition and Social Sport Instructor of Wushu & 
Shadowboxing Skills Competition" (April 8,2006). 
15. Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
- 
at the event of traditional 
apparatus in female youth group in 2006 Beijing 
 Chen Zhaokui Cup' Wushu 
& Shadowboxing Competition and Social Sport Instructor of Wushu & Shadowboxing 
Skills Competition" (April 8,2006). 
16. Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 at the event of traditional 
apparatus in female adult group in 2006 Beijing 'Li Ziming Cup' Wushu Competition 
and Social Sport Instructor of ~iaditional ~uihu~kills  omp petition" (April 15,2006). 
17. Certificate stating that the petitioner won ' at the event of short apparatus in 
female youth group in the First Beijing Haichuan Cup Traditional Eight-diagram Palm 
Competition" (September 23,2006). 
18. Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 at the event of Eight-diagram Palm 
in female youth group in the First Beijing 'Haichuan Cup' Traditional Eight-diagram 
Palm Competition" (September 23,2006). 
19. Honor Certificate stating that the petitioner won 
 at the event of 42-round 
shadowboxing in group A in shadowboxing competition of the Third National Millions of 
Women Body-building Competition" (April 2007) 
20. Honor Certificate stating that the petitioner won - at the event of 24-round 
shadowboxing in group A in shadowboxing competition of the Third National Millions of 
Women Body-building Competition'' (April 2007). 
21. Certificate stating that the petitioner received a -1 in the "other apparatus" event 
category at the "Chinese Wushu Group Tournament" on May 3 1,2007. 
22. Certificate stating that the petitioner received ;in the -n7' 
event category at the "Chinese Wushu Group Tournament" on May 3 1,2007. 
With regard to item 1, the petitioner's appellate submission includes information from the Chinese 
Wushu Association's internet site indicating the requirements for attaining 5th Dan. The information 
states: 
Those that obtained the 4th Dan for over 2 years and meet one of the requirements as follows 
can be promoted to the 5th Dan: 
Exercise a form of fist, a form of melee weapons or double weapons and a form of 
pole-arms with one of the forms obtains a place in the competition and with total 
score of more than 26.25 (total score is 30) in official Form & Promotion 
competitions, receive a score of more than 80 (total score is 100) in the theoretical 
examination of the 5th Dan, display a high degree of Chinese Martial Arts morality 
and ethics. (For Taijiquan, exercise 2 forms of fist and a form of weapons.) 
The plain language of this regulatory criterion requires the petitioner's receipt of "nationally or 
internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field." While the petitioner's 
Wushu Dan Certificate reflects that she was promoted to 5th Dan based on her meeting the two-year 
time requirement and her mastery of required skills and theoretical knowledge, it is apparent that 
such promotions are inherent to the martial arts and that they represent standardized progression to 
the next skill level. Further, there is no evidence showing that the ceremony in which the petitioner 
received her Wushu Dan Certificate commanded national or international recognition. Accordingly, 
the petitioner has not established that passing a martial arts forms and theory examination and 
attaining a higher Dan ranking constitutes her receipt of a nationally or internationally recognized 
prize or award. 
Regarding items 2 and 3, the petitioner submitted an event program from the Eight Diagram 
Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association reflecting that the competition took place at the 
"Teenager Activity Center of Chaoyang District, Beijing" and that she competed against only four 
other entrants in her event. There is no evidence showing that the petitioner's first place Honorary 
Certificates reflect national or international recognition rather than local or institutional recognition. 
With regard to item 4, the petitioner submitted an event program for the Beijing First 'Shuyiyuan' 
Cup Invitational Competition, but there is no evidence showing that she faced a significant number 
of competitors in her event or that her first place certificate reflects national or international 
recognition rather than local recognition. 
In regard to items 5 and 11, the petitioner submitted an event program for the 5h International 
Wushu Invitational Tournament, but there is no evidence showing that she faced more than three 
competitors in her events. 
Regarding items 6 and 7, the petitioner submitted an event program for the First World Traditional 
Wushu Festival, but there is no evidence showing that she faced a significant number of national or 
international competitors in her events. 
With regard to items 8 and 9, the petitioner submitted an event program for the competition, but 
there is no evidence showing that she faced a significant number of competitors in her events. For 
example, the petitioner only competed against seven other entrants in female groups B, C, D to win 
(item 8). According to the competition regulations, Group B consists of competitors age 
Page 6 
45 to 59, Group C consists of competitors age 30 to 44, and Group D consists of competitors age 17 
to 29 years old. 
In regard to item 10, the petitioner submitted the competition regulations, but there is no evidence 
showing that she faced a significant number of national or international competitors in her event. 
Regarding items 12 and 13, these certificates confirm the petitioner's tutelage in the martial arts 
under experienced instructors, but there is no evidence showing that they constitute her receipt of 
nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field. 
With regard to items 14 and 15, the petitioner submitted an event program for the competition, but 
there is no evidence showing that she faced a significant number of competitors in her events. For 
example, the petitioner only competed against three other entrants to win (item 14). In 
earning (item 15), the petitioner faced only six others in her event. 
In regard to item 16, the petitioner submitted an event program for the competition, but there is no 
evidence showing that that her second place certificate reflects national or international recognition 
rather than local recognition. 
Regarding items 17 through 22, the petitioner received these awards subsequent to the petition's 
filing date. 
 A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 
 8 C.F.R. 
$6 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Regl. Commr. 1971). Accordingly, 
the AAO will not consider these awards in this proceeding. 
With regard to awards won by the petitioner in age-group competitions involving only a small 
number of competitors in her category, we do not find that such awards indicate that she "is one of 
that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." See 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(2). There is no indication that the petitioner faced significant competition fi-om 
throughout her field, rather than mostly limited to a few individuals in age-based competition. 
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. Comrnr. 1994); 56 
Fed. Reg. at 60899.~ Likewise, it does not follow that a martial arts competitor who has had success in 
While we acknowledge that a district court's decision is not binding precedent, we note that in Matter of Racine, 1995 
WL 153319 at *4 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 16,1995), the court stated: 
[Tlhe plain reading of the statute suggests that the appropriate field of comparison is not a comparison of 
Racine's ability with that of all the hockey players at all levels of play; but rather, Racine's ability as a 
professional hockey player within the NHL. This interpretation is consistent with at least one other court in this 
district, Grimson v. INS, No. 93 C 3354, (N.D. Ill. September 9, 1993), and the definition of the term 8 C.F.R. 
lj 204.5(h)(21, and the discussion set forth in the preamble at 56 Fed. Reg. 60898-99. 
Although the present case arose within the jurisdiction of another federal judicial district and circuit, the court's 
reasoning indicates that USCIS' interpretation of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. (j 204.5(h)(2) is reasonable. 
age-group competition involving only a small number of participants should necessarily qualify for an 
extraordinary ability employment-based immigrant visa. To find otherwise would contravene the 
regulatory requirement at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2) that this visa category be reserved for "that small 
percentage of individuals that have risen to the very top of their field of endeavor." Further, plain 
language of the regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(h)(3)(i) specifically requires that the 
petitioner's awards be nationally or internationally recognized in the field of endeavor and it is her 
burden to establish every element of this criterion. In this case, there is no evidence showing that 
petitioner's awards commanded a significant level of recognition beyond the context of the events 
where they were presented. For example, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner's awards 
were announced in major media or in some other manner consistent with national or international 
acclaim. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that the categories in which she successfully 
competed resulted in her receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards in the 
martial arts. 
With regard to the petitioner's coaching achievements, nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards won by athletes coached by the petitioner can be considered for this criterion. The 
record, however, does not include such evidence. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in theJeld for which classzjkation 
is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines orfields. 
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, 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 her membership certificate for the Chinese Wushu Association. In response to 
the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a document entitled "Management Method 
for Member of Chinese Wushu Association." Article 9 of this document states: 
People who apply for individual member shall meet the following qualifications: 
(1) Accepting articles of association of Chinese Wushu Association; 
(2) Being able to exercise member's rights and perform members obligations; 
(3) Paying membership fee on time. 
We cannot conclude the above requirements are tantamount to outstanding achievements in the martial 
arts. 
The petitioner also submitted a certificate from the Chinese Wushu Association reflecting that she 
attained a fifth level Dan. While the petitioner has "passed the Wushu Dan Examination" and achieved 
a fiRh level Dan, there is no evidence showing that the Chinese Wushu Association requires a fifth level 
Dan to become a member.3 Further, we cannot conclude that meeting the minimum time requirement 
for holding her preceding Dan and passing the martial arts forms and theory examination constitute 
outstanding achievements. 
The petitioner submitted her "Membership Card" and "Coach Card" for the "Eight Diagram Palm 
Research Society" of the Beijing Wushu Association. The petitioner also submitted the "Regulations 
for Members" which state: 
1) Love the Motherland. Love the learning of the martial arts profession and encourage a spirit 
of dedication. 
2) Establish and maintain a high spirit of martial arts ethics. Respect and obey the law. 
Respect the teachers and the Way. 
3) Continue the practice and development of. Work diligently and advance 
with bravery. Work ceaselessly to increase the level of the martial art. 
4) Actively &ici ate in all activities put on by the organization. Pay dues on time. 
5) Promote band encourage the health of all. 
We cannot conclude that the above requirements are tantamount to outstanding achievements in the 
martial arts. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted an April 10, 2007 Letter 
of Appointment stating that she was employed as a coach of the "Wushu Association of Beijing 
Institute of Technology." The record, however, does not include evidence of the official admission 
requirements (such as membership bylaws) for this association. Further, there is no evidence 
demonstrating that the petitioner was a member of the association as of the petition's filing date. As 
discussed, a petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. $$ 103.2(b)(l), (12); 
Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. 
In this case, there is no evidence showing that preceding associations require outstanding 
achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in the 
martial arts. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the$eld for which classiJication is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary 
translation. 
For example, there is no evidence that first, second, third, and fourth level Dans are excluded from membership in the 
Chinese Wushu Association. 
In general, in order for published material to meet this criterion, it must be primarily about the petitioner 
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 printed in a language that the vast majority of the country's population cannot comprehend. 
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.' 
The petitioner submitted documentation indicating that photographs of her performing martial arts 
moves appeared on pages 24 and 28 of issues number 1 and 2 of Zhonglaonian Baojian in 2006. 
The director concluded that this didactic material was not about the petitioner and her 
accomplishments. Further, there is no evidence (such as circulation statistics) showing that this 
magazine qualifies as a major publication. 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted pages from a book entitled 
Archives of the Beijing Wushu Association. A profile of the petitioner appears on page 258. The 
documentation submitted by the petitioner reflects that the "First Edition" of the book was published 
in May 2007. A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. 
$0 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 49. Accordingly, the AAO will not 
consider this book in this proceeding. Nevertheless, the petitioner has not established this book, or 
any significant portion of it, is about her. Further, there is no evidence (such as national or 
international sales data) showing that the book qualifies as a major publication. 
In responding to the director's request for evidence, counsel asserts that People's Daily, Chinese Wu 
Shu, the Bo Wu International Wu Shu website, Zheng Zhou Daily, Wu Lin Feng, He Nan 
Commercials, the Beijing TV Station, the program "Jingchen Jianshenchao," and the Chinese Wu 
Shu Association have covered the petitioner's awards and achievements. While the petitioner 
submitted general information about the preceding organizations and media outlets, their published 
material or coverage about the petitioner was not submitted. Without documentary evidence to 
support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The 
unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 
533, 534 n.2 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1, 3 n.2 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez- 
Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). Further, the nonexistence or other unavailability of 
primary evidence creates a presumption of ineligibility. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(2)(i). 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the 
work of others in the same or an allied$eld of speciJication for which class@cation is 
sought. 
4 
 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. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) provides that "[a] petition for an alien of extraordinary 
ability must be accompanied by evidence that the alien has sustained national or international 
acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Evidence 
of the petitioner's participation as a judge must be evaluated in terms of these requirements. The 
weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv), therefore, 
depends on the extent to which such evidence demonstrates, reflects, or is consistent with sustained 
national or international acclaim at the very top of the alien's field of endeavor. 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). For example, judging a national competition for 
top athletes is of far greater probative value than judging a regional youth competition. 
The petitioner submitted a January 6,2005 certificate stating that she was "appointed as a commissioner 
of Eight Diagram Palm Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association." This document does not 
provide any information regarding the petitioner's activities as a judge of others. The plain language of 
this regulatory criterion requires "[elvidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a 
panel, as a judge of the work of others in the . . . field." In this instance, there is no evidence showing 
the specific work or competitions judged by the petitioner, the names of those she evaluated, their 
level of expertise, her dates of participation, or documentation of her assessments. Without evidence 
showing, for example, that the petitioner's activities involved judging top competitors or were 
otherwise consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level of her field, 
we cannot conclude that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases. 
The petitioner submitted numerous photographs and two digital video discs showing her presence at 
various events and her participation in martial arts competition. The plain language of this 
regulatory criterion indicates that it applies to the visual arts (such as sculpting and painting) rather 
than to martial arts competition. The ten criteria in the regulations are designed to cover different 
areas; not every criterion will apply to every occupation. The petitioner's participation and success 
in martial arts tournaments has previously been addressed under the awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3)(i). Virtually every athlete "displays" his or her work in the sense of competing in front 
of an audience. The petitioner has not established that her participation in competitions compares to 
the exclusive showcases of an artist's work that is contemplated by this regulation for visual artists. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
In order to establish that she performed in a leading or critical role for an organization or 
establishment with a distinguished reputation, the petitioner must establish the nature of her role 
Page 11 
within the entire organization or establishment and the reputation of the organization or 
establishment. 
The petitioner submitted a January 6,2005 certificate stating that she was "appointed as a commissioner 
of Eight Diagram Palm Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association." The petitioner also submitted 
a recommendation letters from - of the Work Guiding Committee, Eight Diagram 
Palm Research Society of Beijing Wushu Association, stating: 
[The petitioner] always pays attention to the Wushu morality, respects teachers, intelligent and 
practices martial art hard. Therefore, I accepted [the petitioner] as my formal disciple in 2003, 
and she and, my outstandin disciple, have become fellow apprentices. In recent 
years, she is usually instructed by since I'm becoming old. [The petitioner] has a 
good command of Cheng Style Eight Diagram Palm and apparatus sword, dual tomahawk and 
etc. And she has won champions of Eight Diagram Palm and apparatus many times . . . . 
Among lot of my disciples, [the petitioner] may be called "a female hero." 
The record lacks supporting evidence showing that the Eight Diagram Palm Research Society of 
Beijing Wushu Association has a distinguished reputation. Further,- letter does not 
address the petitioner's activities as a commissioner. The petitioner's evidence does not establish 
that her role was leading or critical for the Eight Diagram Palm Research Society of Beijing Wushu 
Association. There is no evidence demonstrating how the petitioner's role differentiated her from the 
other staff and commissioners at the society, let alone its top leadership. The documentation submitted 
by the petitioner does not establish that she was responsible for the organization's 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 she meets this criterion. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate her receipt of a major, internationally recognized 
award, or that she meets at least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. $204.5(h)(3). 
Beyond the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5@)(3), the petitioner submitted several 
recommendation letters praising her talent in the martial arts and summarizing her tournament 
victories. The petitioner's competitive victories have already been addressed under the regulatory 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3)(i). The recommendation letters, while not without weight, cannot 
form the cornerstone of a successful extraordinary ability claim. USCIS may, in its discretion, use 
as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 
19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Cornrnr. 1988). However, USCIS 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; USCIS may 
evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. 
Thus, the content of the experts' statements and how they became aware of the petitioner's reputation 
are important considerations. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by an alien 
in support of an immigration petition are of less weight than preexisting, independent evidence of 
achievements and recognition that one would expect of an individual who has sustained national or 
international acclaim at the very top of the field. 
While recommendation letters can provide usell information about an alien's qualifications or help in 
assigning weight to certain evidence, such letters are not a substitute for objective evidence of the 
alien's achievements and recognition as required by the statute and regulations. The nonexistence of 
required evidence creates a presumption of ineligibility. 
 8 C.F.R. § 103.2@)(2)(i). 
 Further, the 
classification sought requires "extensive documentation" of sustained national or international 
acclaim. 
 See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 
$204.5(h)(3). The commentary for the proposed regulations implementing the statute provides that the 
"intent of Congress that a very high standard be set for aliens of extraordinary ability is reflected in this 
regulation by requiring the petitioner to present more extensive documentation than that required" for 
lesser classifications. 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30704 (July 5, 1991). Primary evidence of achievements 
and recognition is of far greater probative value than opinion statements fiom individuals selected by 
the petitioner. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself to such an extent 
that she may be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within the 
small percentage at the very top of her field. The evidence is not persuasive that the petitioner's 
achievements set her significantly above almost all others in her field at a national or international 
level. Therefore, the petitioner has not established eligibility pursuant to section 203@)(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. 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will 
be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.