dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 5056436 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 17, 2020 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a clarinetist, seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. See hnmigration 
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. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not 
established that he satisfied any of the ten initial evidentiary criteria, of which he must meet at least 
three. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability if: 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204 .5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten 
categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material 
in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a clarinetist who has performed with orchestras and choirs in Kosovo. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
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). The Director found that the Petitioner met none of the evidentiary 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he meets the evidentiary 
criteria relating to awards, membership, critical or leading role, and commercial success. After 
reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we find that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he 
meets at least three of the ten criteria, as required. 
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 record reflects that the Petitioner has been acknowledged by Radio Television! = I the 
Cultural-Artistic Association I I The I I Cultural and Artistic Society I I I Land the Municipality ofc=]Department for Culture-Youth, and Sport for his participation 
in events or contributions to culture. For example, the certificate from Radio Television! I 
awards the Petitioner an "acknowledgement" of his "contribution on accom lishment of the New Year 
Festive Program 2010/2011," 1 while the certificate from~-.---..---~ awards the Petitioner an 
acknowledgement for his "given contribution to The Culture of through the Years." 
The Director determined that this documentation was not sufficient to establish that the Petitioner met 
this criterion as it did not show his receipt of lesser national or international awards for excellence in 
his field of endeavor. 
On appeal, the Petitioner now asserts that he meets this criterion through hil receipr of two additional 
awards: the Grand Prix award at the Internationall I in Kosovo and an 
1 The record also includes a letter ofreference froml I music editor at TVI I confirming the Petitioner's 
participation in "New-Year festive programs." However, this letter does not indicate that the organization granted the 
Petitioner an award or prize for his participation. 
2 
award from tJe '. I cultural center for "performance of high artistic level in international 
competition" I award). He provides certificates, a news article about the 2018 I I a 
document listing the competitive categories for thel lco=0 rtion and the prizes and awards 
conferred thereby, and an untitled document describing the I cultural center and competition. 
However, the Petitioner does not explain why he did not provide this previously available evidence 
with his initial submission or in his response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), or why none 
of the previously submitted evidence, including his own statement, mentions either award. 
~ing the certificate submitted referencing the Petitioner as a "Grand Prix Winner" at the 2014 
L__J we note that it is written only partially in English, and is not accompanied by a certified 
translation as required under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(3). Any document in a foreign language must be 
accompanied by a foll English language translation. The translator must certify that the English 
language translation is complete and accurate, and that the translator is competent to translate from 
the foreign language into English. Id. Because the Petitioner did not submit a properly certified 
English language translation of the document, we cannot meaningfully determine whether the 
certificate supports the Petitioner's claims. Furthermore, he has not provided evidence that 
corroborates his receipt of the "Grand Prix" award at the 2014 I I nor does the record include 
evidence regarding the 20141 lor any awards granted during this festival. 2 
On appeal, the Petitioner also provides a certificate indicating that he received first prize in "Discipline 
Clarinet! I at the 15th I I competition in 2016. The aforementioned document 
describing this competition, which indicates that it pertains to the 2018 edition of the competition, 
states thatl lis "for those born in the years 1999-2000-2001," or for those aged 17 to 19 at 
the time of the competition. However, we note that the record shows that the Petitioner was born in 
1993, and thus would not have been eligible to receive this award in that category in 2016, since he 
would have been 22 years old at the time. The Petitioner must resolve this inconsistency in the record 
with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 
591-92 (BIA 1988). 
Finally, the Petitioner claims on appeal that the "numerous acknowledgements" of his work establish 
that he meets this criterion, as in Kosovo these "acknowledgements rise to the level of national 
recognized awards." As noted by the Director, these certificates do not indicate that they were given 
to the Petitioner for excellence as a clarinet player. Rather, they acknowledge his participation in 
various cultural programs and events. Further, the record lacks evidence corroborating the Petitioner's 
assertion regarding the certificates' national recognition. Therefore, while the record demonstrates 
that the Petitioner was recognized for his participation in these programs, it does not support a 
conclusion that he has received nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence as a 
clarinet player. 
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not established his eligibility for 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 
2 The news article submitted by the Petitioner on appeal describes the 2018 Orather than the 2014 event. 
3 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) 
The Petitioner claims eli:bility for this cTiterir thrmwb bis membership in tbd I Cultural 
and Artistic Society I ~ I and in the_ !choir. The record includes, among other 
evidence, certified trans at10ns of correspondence claimed to be from I [ I J Is 
president, confirming the Petitioner's membership and discussing the organization's membership 
requirements. 3 The Petitioner also provides documentation confirming his membership in the 
I I Choir, correspondence from~ ______ _. president of the choir and a letter of 
recommendation froml I a compositor and orchestra conductor. 4 
As it relates tol f s letters, we note that the record lacks the original untranslated documents 
corresponding to these materials. It is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the benefit 
sought through submission of all required initial evidence. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). Regarding the 
submission of foreign language documents, the regulation provides that the Petitioner shall submit 
such documents accompanied by a full English language translation. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(3). It 
does not indicate that English language translations may be provided in lieu of foreign language 
documents. As the record does not include the foreign language documents, we are unable confirm 
the authenticity of the English translations, and therefore cannot consider them. 
In addition, we note that even ifwe were to consider the translated correspondence claimed to be from 
I I these documents contain inconsistences related to the membership criteria for I I I I For example, one of the translations provides that the criteria used for his selection as a 
member were the Petitioner's "professional musical skills" and "passing of the tests through the 
I I" However, another translation provides alternate membership criteria for! I I l stating that candidates must "show extraordinary skills during the presentation in the audition" 
and are selected for membership "with the proposal of the Professional Evaluation Commission." 5 
The Petitioner must resolve this inconsistency in the record with independent, objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92. As the Petitioner has not submitted 
verifiable and consistent evidence of1 ts membership requirements, he has not established 
that the group requires outstanding achievement of its members. 
The Petitioner also argues on appeal that his membership on thel I Choir establishes that he 
meets this criterion. Here, the record reflects that the Petitioner was an active participant in the 
I I Choir as both I I andl I confirm that the Petitioner was active in 
this organization as both as a choir member and a clarinetist. However, the record does not 
demonstrate that this organization requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by 
national or international experts in the field. Neither I I nor I I provide 
information on the selection process for members of the cho1r, and the record lacks other 
documentation of this process, such as the choir's bylaws, organizational documents, or other 
3 The record also contains documentation confirming the Petitioner's collaboration and performance withl 
and other materials that we have reviewed but do not discuss here. ~------' 
4 The Petitioner also provides information about the choir's participation in the International Festival of World Choirs, 
held in! I France. 
5 We note that the record lacks evidence establishing that the Professional Evaluation Committee is comprised of nationally 
or internationally recognized expe1is in the field, as required by this criterion. 
4 
evidence, showing that it requires outstanding achievements of its members as judged by nationally 
or internationally recognized experts in the field. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he meets this criterion. 
As discussed above, we find that the Petitioner does not satisfy the criteria relating to awards, or 
membership. Although on appeal the Petitioner also claims that he meets the criteria related to leading 
or critical role, and commercial success, we need not reach these issues. We reserve them as the 
Petitioner cannot meet the initial evidentiary requirement of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
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 each); see also 
Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on 
appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
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 
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 for individuals progressing toward the top. 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. Comm'r 1994). 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 )(l)(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 )(1 )(A) of the Act and 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
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