dismissed EB-1A Case: Paper Umbrella Art

~d~t&khg data to 
p='"-dearlg -tad hWon of prsapl- 
US. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: OCT 1 4 ~(JOS 
SRC 05 010 51561 
IN RE: 
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. 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
9 Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employrnent-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 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. 9 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to 
qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
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 to the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
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 riskn to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
9 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supportiqg 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 earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on October 14, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a "Paper Umbrella Artist." The statute and regulations require the petitioner's acclaim to be sustained. 
The record reflects that the petitioner has been residing in the United States since September 1998. Given the 
length of time between the petitioner's arrival in the United States ahd the petition's filing date (more than six 
years), it is reasonable to expect the petitioner to have earned national acclaim in the United States during that 
time. The petitioner has had ample time to establish a reputation as an artist in this country. 
In support of the petition, the petitioner submitted three photographs of what are alleged to be his umbrella 
designs. This evidence, however, was not sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's sustained national or 
international acclaim, or that his achievements have been recognized in his field of expertise. On 
Page 3 
November 10, 2004, the director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner's evidence did not satisfy any 
of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(3). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 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, international 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. On appeal, the petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Documentation of the alien's receiyt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in theJield of endeavor. 
The petitioner submits a certificate (dated December 21, 1997) indicating that he received a "Golden Award of 
artistic exhibition of works of World Conference on Malay Art." The record, however, contains no evidence 
of publicity surrounding this conference or evidence showing that the petitioner's award enjoys a significant 
level of recognition. In order to satisfy this criterion, the petitioner must provide evidence showing that his 
award enjoys significant national or international stature. In this case, the reeord contains no documentation 
from the awarding entity or print media to establish that the petit&ner's award is a nationally or 
internationally recognized award for excellence in the ants. 
Evidence of the display of the alien's work in thefield at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner re-submits the three photographs of what are alleged to be his umbrella designs, stating that the 
items were displayed at his individual design exhibitions in 1993 and 1999. The record, however, contains no 
evidence showing that any such exhibitions ever took place. Going on record without supporting 
documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. 
Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 
I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
It must be stressed that an artist does not satisfy this criterion simply by arranging for his or her work to be 
displayed or sold. In this case, the petitioner has not submitted evidence demonstrating that his works have 
been displayed at significant national venues. Nor is there any indication that the petitioner's works have 
been featured along side those of artists who enjoy national or international reputations. Furthermore, the 
petitioner has not demonstrated his regular participation in shows or exhibitions at exclusive venues devoted 
largely to the display of his work alone. The evidence presented by the petitioner is not sufficient to show 
that his exhibitions enjoy a national reputation or that participation in his exhibitions was a privilege extended 
to only top national or international artists. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
= Page 4 
The petitioner submits a single page bearing four captioned photogxaphs (including information such as item 
numbers, sizes and prices) from what he allegesis a catalog of his designs and products.' The plain wording of 
ths criterion, however, indicates that it is intended for "performing" artists such as musicians and actors rather 
than the petitioner's occupation. Nevertheless! the regulation calls for commercial success in the form of "sales" 
or "receipts"; simply asserting that one's work has appeared in a product catalog cannot satisfy criterion. The 
record contains no evidence of documented "sales" or "receipts" showing significant national distribution of 
the petitioner's products or their widespread commercial success. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that he meets at least three of the criteria that must be satisfied 
to establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
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 within 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. Therdfore, the petitioner has not established 
eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the petition may'not be approved. 
Beyond the decision of the director, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(15) requires "clear evidence that the 
alien is coming to the United States to continue work in the area of expertise. Such evidence may include 
letter(s) from prospective employer(s), evidence of prearranged commitments such as contracts, or a 
statement from the beneficiary detailing plans on how he or She intends to continue his or her work in the 
United States." The record contains no such evidence. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial decision. See 
Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), afld. 345 F.3d 683 
(9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the AAO reviews 
appeals on a de novo basis). 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit 
sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
There is no evidence showing that the petitioner has ever developed or distributed such a catalog.