dismissed EB-1A Case: Peking Opera

.-4. 
IJ.~:~e~artment 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: S EP 2 8 2005 
SRC 05 008 51302 
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. 5 1 153(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. 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office 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. § 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in 
the arts. 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 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 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 risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(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. 5 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that 
the petitioner must show that she has earned sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on October 12, 2004, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as a Peking Opera performer. 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 February 2001. Given the 
length of time between the petitioner's arrival in the United States and the petition's filing date, 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 a performer in this country. 
The petition was unaccompanied by supporting evidence. On November 10, 2004, the director denied the 
petition, finding that the petitioner had not established eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
Page 3 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(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 receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awardsfor excellence in the field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submits a fdl-in-the-blank "Artistic Achievement Award certificate allegedly issued in 2002 by 
the Henry Street Settlement/Abrons Art Center for "unique contributions to the cultural diversity of the City of 
New York." This award constitutes local or institutional recognition rather than national or international 
recognition. 
The petitioner also submits a Certificate of Award from the Guangdong Star Shining Art Festival (1997) and a 
Certificate of Honor from the Sichuan Province Television Station (1997), but these awards represent provincial 
recognition rather than national or international recognition. 
The petitioner also submits three Certificates of Honor and accompanying English language translations 
indicating that she "participated in the Joint Party of Chinese New Year [sic] Eve" in 1996 and 1999. The 
petitioner offers no evidence showing that these certificates are nationally recognized performing arts awards, 
rather than simply an acknowledgment of her participation in the event. 
The petitioner also submits certificates and accompanying English language translations indicating that she 
received the following: 
1. Excellent performance prize in the 1997 National Traditional Opera Exchange Show 
2. Plum Blossom Award of Chinese Traditional Opera (1997) 
3. Excellent Prize of Lao-Dan Group in the 1998 National Traditional Opera Stage Performance 
Competition 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(b)(3), any document containing foreign language submitted to Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (CIS) shall be accompanied by a full English language translation that the translator has 
certified as complete and accurate, and by the translator's certification that he or she is competent to translate 
from the foreign language into English. The translations accompanying the petitioner's award certificates 
were not certified as required by the regulation. 
The record contains no evidence of publicity surrounding the petitioner's awards or evidence showing that 
they enjoy a significant level of recognition. Simply receiving an award certificate with the word "national" 
in the title does not satisfy this very restrictive criterion. Because the statute requires "extensive 
documentation" of sustained national or international acclaim, the petitioner must submit contemporaneous 
Page 4 
evidence showing that her awards enjoy significant national or international stature.' In this case, the record 
contains no documentation from the awarding entities or print media to establish that the petitioner's awards 
are nationally recognized performing arts awards. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the$eld, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submits evidence of her alleged authorship of an article in Peking Opera Pages entitled 
"Costumes and Stage Properties." The record, however, contains no evidence showing that this article was 
actually published or evidence of its significant national or international distribution. Nor is there supporting 
evidence showing that the petitioner's article is viewed throughout her field as significantly influential. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the perjorming arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
The petitioner submits three photographs of what are alleged to be her Peking Opera performances.2 The 
petitioner has listed a dollar amount under each of these photographs, asserting that the dollar amount listed 
represents the box office revenue for the particular production shown in each photograph. The record, 
however, contains no evidence to support the petitioner's assertions. Going on record without supporting 
documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. 
Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 
I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comrn. 1972)). In this case, there is no evidence (such as financial records) indicating 
that the productions shown in the petitioner's photographs actually earned the dollar amounts claimed. The 
plain wording of this criterion calls for commercial success in the form of "sales" or "receipts"; simply asserting 
that one's alleged productions grossed varying revenue amounts cannot satisfy criterion. To satisfy this 
criterion, the petitioner must establish that her performances have consistently drawn larger audiences and/or 
higher box office grosses than most others in her field, at the national or international level. The record 
includes no such evidence. 
In this case, we concur with the director's finding that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she meets at 
least three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
It should be noted that the record contains a copy of the petitioner's passport, issued in Henan by the Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China on July 14, 2000. Under "Profession," the passport 
1 For example, large-scale competitions typically issue event programs listing the order of events, the name of each 
specific event, and the names of the participating performers. At a competition's conclusion, results are usually provided 
indicating how each participant performed in relation to the other competitors in his or her events. The petitioner, 
however, has provided no evidence of the official comprehensive results for the competitions in which she received 
prizes. 
2 
While we cannot state with certainty that none of these photographs show the petitioner, we note that a recent 
photograph of the petitioner attached to her Form 1-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence of Adjust Status, 
bears little resemblance to any of the women in the Peking Opera photographs submitted on appeal. 
identifies the petitioner as an "Engineer," despite the petitioner's claim that she is nationally recognized as a 
Peking Opera performer. The petitioner has not resolved this discrepancy. It is incumbent upon the petitioner 
to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence. Any attempt to explain or 
reconcile such inconsistencies will not suffice unless the petitioner submits competent objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). Doubt cast on any 
aspect of the petitioner's proof may, of course, lead to a reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the 
remaining evidence offered in support of the visa petition. 
Review of the record does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished herself as a performer 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(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)(5) 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. 
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.