dismissed EB-1A Case: Music

U.S. Department of Elomeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
MAIL STOP 2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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. 3 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. 
V 
SJohn F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service 
Center. The petitioner filed an appeal with the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), which remanded the 
matter to the director for further action and consideration. The matter is now before the AAO upon certification 
of the director's subsequent, adverse decision. The decision of the director will be affirmed and the petition will 
be denied. 
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. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in 
the arts. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international 
acclaim necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On certification, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3) and has submitted other comparable evidence of his extraordinary ability pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
$ 204.5(h)(4). 
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 ths 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. $ 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. 9 204.5(h)(3). 
The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show 
that he has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
Page 3 
This petition, filed on October 11, 2005, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a drummer of Filipino jazz music. The statute and regulations require the petitioner's national or 
international acclaim as a musician to be sustained. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
6 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). According to the petitioner's Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition 
for Alien Worker, and his Form 1-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, his 
"Date of Last Arrival" in the United States was July 29, 1999. Although the petitioner has been residing in 
the United States since 1999, there is no evidence establishing that he has sustained national acclaim as a jazz 
drummer in this country. Further, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner's acclaim in the Philippines 
was sustained during the decade preceding the filing of this petition. 
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). 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. fj 204.5(h)(2). The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following 
criteria. ' 
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 orfields. 
The petitioner submitted a July 19, 2005 letter from, Vice-President and Chairman, Asosasyon 
Ng Musikong Pilipino Foundation, Inc. (AMP), stating that the petitioner is "a bona fide member of the AMP 
in good standing." ~r. letter does not provide information regarding the AMP'S specific 
requirements for admission to membership. The petitioner also submitted a May 29, 2005 letter from - 
, a bass player and member of the Filipino jazz group Affinity, stating: "In order to be a 
member of Asosasyon Ng Musikong Pilipino Foundation, Inc., a person is required to have sustained 
outstanding achievements in the musical field as 'ud ed by recognized national experts in the musical field." 
There is no evidence showing that - is an official representative of the AMP. As such, it is 
not apparent how : is qualified to provide information regarding the AMP'S membership 
requirements. There is no evidence (such as membership bylaws or official admission requirements) showing 
that the AMP requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by recognized national or 
international experts in the petitioner's field or an allied one. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
I 
 The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this decision. 
Page 4 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
nzedia, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classlJicatiorz is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessaly translation. 
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 or international level from a local publication. 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.2 
The petitioner submitted a February 6, 2003 internet article posted at http:il\~ww.philn~usic.con~ entitled 
"Adobo Jazz is Now Cooking." The article discusses ' launch of an independent music album 
project entitled "Adobo Jazz, Volume 1" and only mentions the petitioner's name in passing. The petitioner 
also submitted a July 17, 2004 internet article posted at http:/iwww.houstonculture.org entitled "Pinoy Rock 
Legends Rock Houston." The article discusses a dual concert given by guitarist and the pop 
music group Hotdog. Briefly mentioning the petitioner only once, the article states: "Backed by a trio of 
local players that included expatriated former Manila session-drummer [the petitioner], Mike took us on a ride 
down the streets of Pinoy rock history, streets he once ruled as he worked to define the genre in the 1970s.. . ." 
Neither of the preceding articles is primarily about the petitioner. The plain language of this regulatory 
criterion, however, requires that the published material be "about the alien." Further, there is no evidence 
showing that the internet sites which posted the preceding articles qualify as major media. 
The petitioner submitted a document posted on the internet at http://www.geocities.com entitled "Manila's 
Pool of Session Musicians." The document lists the petitioner's name along with eleven other entries under 
the heading "Some of the Philippines top musicians who are now residing or making their living elsewhere." 
According to the "Index of Exhibits" submitted by the petitioner, the preceding document was "from 
website." The petitioner also submitted a December 6, 2004 letter of support from a 
identifying him as a "good friend of [the petitioner] for many years." The inclusion of the petitioner's entry 
in his friend's internet posting does not constitute published material about him in professional or major trade 
publications or some other form of major media. Nor is such an entry evidence of the petitioner's sustained 
national or international acclaim at the very top of his field. 
On certification, the petitioner submitted an excerpt from a book entitled Pinoy Jazz Traditions which was 
published in 2004.~ Pages 198 through 203 of the book reflect the author's interview of John Lesaca, a jazz 
violinist, who the author refers to as "a formidable force in the contemporary development of Pinoy jazz." On 
page 201, M-states that he released three albums and identifies the petitioner among nine of his 
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. 
3 
 The record includes supporting evidence showing that this book received favorable reviews, won the National Book 
Award for "Best Book on Music" from the Manila Critics Circle in 2004, and was later made into 59-minute video 
documentary about the development of jazz in the Philippines. 
Page 5 
session musicians who he collectively describes as "outstanding jazz artists in their own right." There is no 
evidence showing that the petitioner was singled out for discussion or further mentioned in Pinoy Jazz 
Traditions. The petitioner has not established that this book, or any significant portion of it, is about him. 
The petitioner's appellate submission included an article about him in the March 2006 issue of Fil-Am Press 
entitled "[The petititioner]: Versatile musician." The petitioner also submitted a letter from the publisher and 
editor of Fil-Am Press stating: "Fil-Am Press, published monthly out of Houston, Texas, has a circulation of 
10,000 copies and is distributed free to Filipino-American communities in the entire state of Texas." The 
distribution information for this local publication tailored to the Filipino segment of the Texas population 
does not establish that it qualifies as a form of major media. In response to the director's February 21, 2007 
request for evidence, the petitioner submitted an April 18, 2007 article about him in the "Pinoy Abroad7' 
section of the Greater Manila Area (GMA) News and Public Affairs website stating: "In 1999, [the 
petitioner] came to Houston to live with his sister and pursue his dream of making it in the United States. . . . 
He plays small venues in Houston and often travels to Reno, Nevada, for concerts. He hopes to move to Los 
Angeles in a year to reunite with his friendnd create jazz music." There is no evidence 
showing that the "Pinoy Abroad section of the GMA News and Public Affairs internet site has significant 
national or international readership. Nevertheless, the preceding articles were published subsequent to the 
petition's filing date. 
 A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 
 8 C.F.R. 
$4 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Regl. Comrnr. 1971). Accordingly, the AAO 
will not consider these articles in this proceeding. 
On certification, counsel argues that the director should have considered the album covers of Philippine jazz 
music that identify the petitioner's name in the credits as a drummer. The petitioner submitted evidence 
showing. that his name was included in the album credits for 
The mere fact that the petitioner's name appeared in the album credits on another musician's record sleeve 
does not render the sleeve a publication about the petitioner. Further, we cannot ignore that the album covers 
submitted by the petitioner are limited to music released in the 1980s and early 1990s. The statute and 
regulations require the petitioner's national or international acclaim as a jazz musician to be sustained. 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). In this case, there is 
no evidence of musical recordings released by the petitioner under his own name or that of other jazz musicians 
in the twelve years preceding the petition's filing date. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien S original scientzjic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signzjicance in the field. 
We acknowledge the petitioner's submission of several reference letters praising his talent and notoriety as a 
drummer of Filipino jazz music. Talent and notoriety in one's field, however, are not necessarily indicative of 
artistic contributions of major significance. The record lacks evidence showing that the petitioner has made 
original artistic contributions that have significantly influenced or impacted his field. 
On certification, counsel argues that the director erred by failing to consider the January 2006 reference letters 
from and 
 because they were written subsequent to the petition's filing 
date. In addressing these letters, the director cited Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. at 45,49, in which it was 
held that an alien must be qualified at the time the petition is filed. A petition may not be approved after the 
alien becomes eligible under a new set of facts. Id. at 49. The content of the letters from and 
however, does not indicate that they were discussing new facts, qualifications, or achievements 
that post-date the filing of the petition. As such, we agree with counsel that their letters can be considered. 
, Executive Director, Sparacino Company Dancers, Houston, Texas, states: 
As a drummer of Philippino jazz music, [the petitioner] keeps alive the rare and ancient traditions of 
the Philippino culture through both his musical performances and his teaching of jazz music. His 
cultural contributions are particularly appreciated by the Philippino community in Houston and South 
Texas. 
[The petitioner's] expertise as a drummer of Philippino jazz music is an artistic contribution of major 
significance in the field. His skills are culturally unique and his talents showcase the cultural heritage 
and musical traditions of the Philippines. He is one of only a few people keeping this tradition of 
Philippino jazz music alive and kicking. His performances as a Philippino jazz drummer in numerous 
programs and shows in Houston, fulfills a cultural education need of the community and enhances the 
audiences' knowledge and appreciation for the Philippino jazz music culture. 
- 
states that he is a professional drummer residing in Houston, Texas. He further states: 
[The petitioner's] work as a drummer of Filipino jazz music will greatly benefit the U.S. economy as 
well as Filipino cultural organizations here, since he will have a vital role in helping keep the Filipino 
jazz music culture alive here in the U.S., through his musical performances and teachings of jazz 
music. His cultural contributions are particularly appreciated by the Filipino community in Houston 
and South Texas. 
[The petitioner's] expertise as a drummer of Filipino jazz music is an artistic contribution of major 
significance in the field. His culturally unique skills and talents help foster and promote the cultural 
heritage and vast musical traditions of our native country, the Philippines. [The petitioner] is 
amongst the very few Filipino jazz artists here in the U.S. keeping the traditions of Filipino jazz 
music from fading into history. His culturally unique performance as a Filipino jazz drummer in 
numerous showcases and exhibits in the U.S. educates the cultural needs of the community and 
enhances the U.S. audiences' appreciation for the Filipino jazz music culture. 
The preceding letters from 
 and both state that the petitioner's "expertise as a 
drummer of Filipino jazz music is an artistic contribution of major significance in the field." We cannot 
conclude that the petitioner has made original artistic contributions of major significance in his field simply 
through having expertise as a drummer of Filipino jazz music. The preceding letters include no substantive 
discussion as to which of the petitioner's specific achievements rise to the level of original artistic 
contributions of major significance in jazz music. According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3)(v), an 
alien's contributions must he not only original but of major significance. We must presume that the phrase 
Page 7 
"major significance" is not superfluous and, thus, that it has some meaning. While the petitioner's local U.S. 
performances have earned the admiration of "the Filipino community in Houston and South Texas," there is 
nothing to demonstrate that his work has had major significance in the field at large. For example, the record 
does not indicate the extent of the petitioner's influence on other drummers nationally or internationally, nor 
does it show that the field has somehow changed as a result of his work. 
In this case, the reference letters submitted by the petitioner are not sufficient to meet this criterion. These 
letters, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a successful extraordinary ability claim. 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 
recommendation letters from the petitioner's personal contacts 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. 
Thus, the content of the writers' 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 original contributions of 
major significance that one would expect of a jazz musician who has sustained national or international 
acclaim at the very top of his field. Without extensive documentation showing that the petitioner's work has 
been unusually influential, highly acclaimed throughout his field, or has otherwise risen to the level of 
original contributions of major significance, we cannot conclude that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the$eld at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
On certification, counsel argues that the petitioner's reference letters, the listing of his name in the credits of 
albums released by other musicians, and the evidence of his "participation in the United States with renowned 
Philippine jazz musicians" meets this regulatory criterion. As stated by the director, the plain language of this 
regulatory criterion indicates that it is intended for visual artists (such as sculptors and painters) rather than 
for performing artists such as the petitioner. It is inherent to the occupation of musician to perform on stage or 
to make recordings of one's work. Not every musical performance is an artistic exhibition or showcase indicative 
of national or international acclaim at the very top of the field. The reputation of the venues where the petitioner 
has played is relevant to the distinguished reputation of the musical group in which the petitioner plays and, thus, 
the regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3)(viii). The ticket sales at these venues and the record sales for his 
albums are relevant to the petitioner's commercial successes and, thus, the regulatory criterion set forth at 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(x). Such evidence is less persuasive as evidence to meet ths criterion, set forth at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5@)(3)(vii). Nevertheless, we will consider the petitioner's evidence below. 
The petitioner submitted evidence showing that his name was included in the album credits for -1 
1990), (1985),- 
cus of these albums was the featured artists' music rather 
than the petitioner's music. For example, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner was offered a 
recording contract for his music in the same manner as the preceding musicians. The petitioner also 
submitted promotional pamphlets for an '1Eddie K. & His Band" jazz concert at the Houston Community 
College's Heinen Theater in 2000 and a "Mike Mediano & Friends" jazz concert in 2001 at the Manila 
Peninsula Restaurant in Orange, California. There is no evidence showing the significance of the preceding 
venues or that the petitioner's music was the primary focus of the concerts. For example, there is no evidence 
that the petitioner was the headlining musician in the same manner as or - 
The petitioner has not established that the evidence submitted for this regulatory criterion is 
indicative of sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of his field. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has peformed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
On certification, counsel argues that the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role by playing the drums 
on albums released by and -. The petitioner 
submitted supporting evidence showing thalwon an Awit Award in 1991 from the 
Philippine Association of the Record Industry and that - became a gold record. 
The petitioner also submitted a July 19, 2005 letter from but his letter does not state that the 
petitioner performed for him in a leading or critical role. Further, the record does not include letters of 
support firvrn 1 and discussing the importance of the petitioncr7s 
role in their music. While the record contains evidence (including published material) showing that the 
preceding musicians had distinguished reputations in the Philippines, we cannot ignore that they played the 
primary role in their own musical success. We further note that they utilized other instrumentalists on their 
albums in addition to the petitioner. As there is no evidence demonstrating how the petitioner's role 
critical." Finally, we note that the albums on which the petitioner performed were released in the 1980s and 
early 1990s. The statute and regulations require the petitioner's national or international acclaim as a jazz 
musician to be sustained. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 
$ 204.5(h)(3). In ths case, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner has performed on an album in the 
twelve years preceding the petition's filing date. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he was responsible 
for the preceding musicians' 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 he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
and photographs showing that he performed in concerts headlined by other musicians. This regulatory 
criterion calls for commercial successes in the form of "sales" or "receipts"; simply submitted evidence indicating 
that the petitioner participated in various concerts or musical recordings cannot meet the plain language of this 
criterion. The record does not include evidence of documented "sales" or "receipts" showing that the 
petitioner achieved commercial successes in the performing arts in a manner consistent with sustained 
national or international acclaim at the very top of his field. For example, there is no evidence showing that 
the petitioner's performances consistently drew record crowds, were regular sell-out performances, or resulted 
in greater audiences than other similar performances that did not feature the petitioner. We acknowledge the 
petitioner's submission of evidence indicating that -2 became a gold record. 
However, there is no evidence showing that the success of album was primarily attributable 
to the petitioner rather than to himself. Nor is there evidence showing that the petitioner 
received a large percentage of royalties from s gold record. With regard to the remaining 
albums, there is no evidence showing that they generated substantial national or international sales or that 
their success was mostly attributable to the petitioner. Finally, there is no evidence showing that the 
petitioner has enjoyed commercial successes during the last decade. The statute and regulations require the 
petitioner's national or intemational acclaim as a jazz musician to be sustained. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. fj 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
In this case, we concur with the director's determination that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate his 
receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, or that he meets at least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
3 204.5(h)(3). The conclusion we reach by considering the evidence to meet each criterion separately is 
consistent with a review of the evidence in the aggregate. Even in the aggregate, the evidence does not 
distinguish the petitioner as one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). Further, there is no evidence showing that the petitioner's national or international 
acclaim as a jazz drummer has been sustained. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3). Specifically, the record includes no evidence of nationally or 
internationally acclaimed achievements and recognition subsequent to his arrival in the United States in 1999. 
In a May 17, 2007 letter responding to the director's request for evidence, counsel argues that the reference 
letters, the album credits identifying the petitioner, and the information from website are 
comparable evidence of the petitioner's extraordinary ability pursuant to 8 C.F.R. fj 204.5(h)(4). 
 This 
evidence has already been addressed under the regulatory criteria 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). Further, there is no 
evidence showing that the documentation the petitioner requests re-evaluation of as comparable evidence 
constitutes achievements and recognition consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the 
very top of his field. 
 Whle recommendation letters can provide useful 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. 3 103.2(b)(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. 9 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3). The commentary for the 
proposed regulations implementing the statute provide that the "intent of Congress that a very high standard be set 
for aliens of extraordinary ability is reflected in ths 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 the opinions of one's 
personal contacts. 
Nevertheless, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(4) allows for the submission of "comparable evidence" 
only if the ten criteria "do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation." The regulatory language 
precludes the consideration of comparable evidence in this case, as there is no indication that eligibility for 
visa preference in the petitioner's occupation cannot be established by the ten criteria specified by the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). Where an alien is simply unable to meet three of these criteria, the plain 
language of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(4) does not allow for the submission of comparable 
evidence. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself to such an extent that he may 
be said to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be withn the small percentage at the 
very top of his field. The evidence is not persuasive that the petitioner's achievements set him significantly above 
almost all others in his field at the national or international level. Therefore, the petitioner has not established 
eligbility 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. 5 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: 
 The director's decision of July 23,2008 is affirmed. The petition is denied.