dismissed EB-1A Case: Performing Arts

PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
EAC 02 287 54269 
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. 9 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. 
nGp b 
>Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont 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. 5 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. 
On appeal, the petitioner argues that the service center did not fully evaluate her expertise. 
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 September 18, 2002, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary 
ability as a performing artist. 
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, 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. The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following criteria. 
Page 3 
Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognizedprizes 
or awards for excellence in thej?eld of endeavor. 
The petitioner submitted the following: 
1. Photograph of a trophy (inscription illegible) under which a caption appears stating: "Prize Cup of 
Appraised Excellence Number 1, from January 2000 'New Pingtan Program Demonstrating 
Performance' in Shanghai" 
2. 
 "Certificate of Prize" from the Ministry of Culture stating that the petitioner was "awarded Prize of 
Excellent Performance in 6' China Arts Festival Suzhou Pingtan competition" 
3. "Certificate of Glory" (dated June 13, 2001) from the China Dialectical Vocal Artists Association 
inviting the petitioner "to participate in the China Eminent Dialectical Vocal Artists' Excellent 
Works Demonstrating Performance" 
4. "Award Certificate" (dated September 7, 2000) stating that the petitioner "won the excellent 
performing award in Suzhou Lyrics Competition in the 6' Chinese Art Festival." 
5. Certificate (dated September 1997) stating that the petitioner "won the excellent performing award in 
the 2nd Drama and Art Festival of Jiangsu Province" 
6. "Honor Certificate" (dated November 1999) stating that the petitioner "won the excellent performing 
award in the 3'* Drama and Art Festival of Jiangsu Province" 
7. Certificate (dated October 1994) stating that the petitioner won an excellent performer award at the 
1" Drama and Art Festival of Jiangsu Province 
8. Certificate (dated February 28, 1987) stating that the petitioner won the "excellent performer award 
among young actor [sic] in Sanqiang Cup Lyrics Contest of Jiangsu Province" 
9. "Honor Certificate" from the Cultural Bureau of Suzhou City stating that the petitioner won the New 
Star Award (March 1999) 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(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 items 4 through 9 were not certified 
as required by the regulation. 
In regard to items 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, we find that these awards reflect local or provincial recognition rather than 
national or international recognition. 
In regard to items 2, 4, and 8, we note that large-scale competitions typically issue event programs listing the 
award categories and the names of the participating contestants. At a competition's conclusion, results are 
normally provided indicating how each participant performed in relation to the other contestants in his or her 
artistic category. The petitioner, however, has submitted no evidence of an event program or the official 
comprehensive results from the competitions she won. 
In regard to items 1 through 9, there is no evidence of contemporaneous publicity surrounding the petitioner's 
awards or evidence showing that they command a substantial level of recognition. Further, the record 
includes no evidence that would demonstrate the number of awards given, the geographic area from which the 
Page 4 
individuals eligible for consideration for these awards were drawn from, the criteria for granting these awards, 
the level of expertise of those considered, and the number of individuals eligible to compete. We note here 
that section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act requires extensive documentation of sustained national or international 
acclaim. Pursuant to the statute, the petitioner must provide adequate evidence showing that the awards 
presented under this criterion enjoy significant national or international stature. In this case, there is no 
supporting documentation from the awarding entities or print media to establish that the petitioner's awards 
are nationally or internationally recognized awards. 
In a May 26, 2005 letter responding to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner asserts that notices 
indicating that her biographical entry was to be published in The Favorite Sons of China, BeautifuI Motherland 
Large Picture Album, International Who's Who, Dictionary of International Figures, Expert-Scholar Directory, 
China Experts Achievements Directory, and Directory of Outstanding World Artists are adequate to satisfy this 
criterion.' We cannot accept these notices as evidence, however, because they were not accompanied by full, 
certified English language translations as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). Nevertheless, 
books of this size, with such a limited portion devoted to the petitioner, are more of a comprehensive directory 
rather than a special form of recognition limited to an elite few. Appearing as one of thousands, or even 
hundreds of other successful individuals in a frequently published directory is not evidence of national 
acclaim. Interestingly, the record includes no evidence of the published entry about the petitioner appearing 
in these books or their date of publication. The notices submitted by the petitioner relating to the 
aforementioned publications will be further addressed under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted a Certificate of Honor (dated 
January 13,2004) from the Suzhou Broadcasting and Television Station naming her "one of the ten best loved 
Pingtan Performer." The petitioner's response also included a certificate (dated April 10, 2004) with the 
heading "THE 1 lTH CCTV INTERNATlONAL SINGING COMPETITION EAST COAST REGION (USA) 
EXCELLENCE AWARD." The preceding certificates reflect regional recognition rather than national or 
international recognition. Further, these certificates were issued to the petitioner subsequent to the petition's 
filing date. A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(12); see 
Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45 (Comm. 1971). Accordingly, the AAO is not required to consider these 
certificates in this proceeding. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
I 
 Aside from The Favorite Sons of China and China Experts Achievements Directory, the correspondence informing the 
petitioner of her inclusion in the remaining publications consisted of pre-printed, fill-in-the-blank, form-style letters of 
notification with the petitioner's name handwritten into a blank space in the salutation. The petitioner's inclusion in these 
publications is far more relevant to the published materials criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). Here it should be 
emphasized that the regulatory criteria are separate and distinct from one another. Because separate criteria exist for 
awards and published materials about the alien, CIS clearly does not view the two as being interchangeable. If evidence 
sufficient to meet one criterion mandated a finding that an alien met another criterion, the requirement that an alien meet 
at least three criteria would be meaningless. 
Page 5 
Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the$eld for which classiJication 
is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized 
national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
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, grade point average, recommendations by colleagues or current 
members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion as such requirements do not constitute outstanding 
achievements. In addition, it is clear from the regulatory language that members must be selected at the 
national or international level, rather than the local or regional level. Therefore, membership in an association 
that evaluates its membership applications at the local or regional chapter level would not qualify. Finally, 
the overall prestige of a given association is not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements 
rather than the association's overall reputation. 
In a September 12, 2002 letter accompanying the petition, the petitioner claims membership in the China 
Dramatists Association and the China Association of Folk Artists. The record, however, includes no evidence 
of her membership credentials for these associations. Going on record without supporting documentary 
evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soflci, 
22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. 
Comm. 1972)). 
In response to the director's request for evidence, the petitioner submitted letters allegedly issued by the 
China Theater Artists Association and the Jiangsu Theater Artists Association stating that she is a member of 
these associations. These letters, however, include no address, telephone number, or any other information 
through which these associations may be contacted. Further, we cannot accept these letters as evidence 
because the English language translations accompanying them were not certified as required by the regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. 9 103.2(b)(3). 
In addition to the preceding deficiencies, the record does not include the membership bylaws or the official 
admission requirements for the aforementioned associations. There is no indication that admission to 
membership in these organizations required outstanding achievement or that the petitioner was evaluated by 
national or international experts in consideration of her admission to membership. Thus, the petitioner has 
not established that she meets this criterion. 
Published materials about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in thejeld for which cla;ssi$cation is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
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 or fiom a publication in a language that most 
of the population cannot comprehend. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, nominally serve a 
Page 6 
particular locality but would qualify as major media because of significant national distribution, unlike small local 
community papers.2 
As stated previously, the petitioner submitted notices indicating that her biographical entry was to be published in 
The Favorite Sons of China, Beautiful Motherland Large Picture Album, International Who's Who, Dictionary of 
International Figures, Expert-Scholar Directory, China Experts Achievements Directory, and Directory of 
Outstanding World Artists. None of these notices were accompanied by evidence of the published entry about 
the petitioner appearing in the books, nor were they accompanied by full, certified English language 
translations as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 4 103.2(b)(3). The plain language of this criterion, 
however, requires the submission of "published materials about the alien" including "the title, date, and author of 
the material, and any necessary translation," The aforementioned notices cannot carry the same weight as the 
published materials themselves. Further, there is no evidence showing that the preceding publications qualify as 
major media. Nor is there any indication that the editors of these publications singled out the petitioner as 
superior to the scores of other artists featured in those same volumes. We cannot conclude that the petitioner's 
limited entry into such sizable tomes would constitute qualifying published material about the petitioner and her 
work. 
The petitioner submitted incomplete, non-certified English language translations of articles appearing in 
Jiangsu Tong Zhan, Suzhou Daily, European Times, Quyi [Dialect Vocal Arts], Taiwan Minsheng Newspaper, 
Macao Monthly Journal, World Daily, Macao Daily, People's Daily Overseas Edition, Xinhua News, Ren 
Min Daily, Liberation Daily, Gusu Evening News, Ming Pao Daily, Xingdao Daily, Shanghai Radio and 
Broadcasting Journal, Suzhou Radio and Broadcasting, China Press (dated May 22, 2005), and Suzhou 
Evening News (dated January 30, 2004). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3), however, requires the 
petitioner's published material to be accompanied by full certified English language translations. Further, 
there is no evidence showing that the preceding publications had substantial national or international 
readership. Finally, we note that the articles appearing in China Press and Suzhou Evening News (submitted 
in response to the director's request for evidence) were published subsequent to the petition's filing date. A 
petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(12); see Matter of 
Katigbak at 4.5. Accordingly, the AAO will not consider the latter two articles in this proceeding. 
The petitioner also submitted an article (published in English) appearing in a 1994 issue of Kyoto Journal. 
There is no evidence showing that this publication had substantial national or international readership. 
Further, the article, entitled "On the Road with the Suzhou Storytellers," is about several artists and refers to 
the petitioner as an "assisting storyteller" rather than "the lead." The article also states: "[The petitioner] has 
apprenticed with Jiang Yunxian, a top woman storyteller who performs alone. The solo act is a venerable 
tradition . . . ." The Kyoto Journal article does refer to the petitioner as a lead storyteller or discuss her solo 
performances. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a January 2001 article in Quyi that discusses two performances given by the 
Suzhou City Pingtan Troupe (of which she is a member). The petitioner, however, is not the main subject of 
2 
 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, cannot 
serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 7 
the article. The plain language of this criterion, however, requires "published materials about the alien." If the 
petitioner is not the primary subject of the material, then it fails to demonstrate her individual acclaim. We note 
that the petitioner's name does not appear among the three individuals listed as the "first grade" actors of her 
troupe. 
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 apanel, as a judge of the work of 
others in the same or an alliedfield of spec$cation for which class$cation is sought. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(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. For example, serving as a judge for a national 
competition involving professional musicians is of far greater probative value than serving as a judge for a local 
competition involving amateurs or children. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits an October 23, 1998 letter from Fu Jiao Long Zi School Number 4 stating: 
"[The petitioner] is hereby respectfully employed as appraisal commissioner for examination appraisal of 
graduating class for the year 1998 from Art-&-Music-for-Drama Class of this school." This letter, however, 
includes no address, telephone number, or any other information through which this school may be contacted. 
Further, the plain wording of this criterion requires "[elvidence of the alien's participation . . . as a judge of the 
work of others." The record, however, includes no evidence of the petitioner's activities as an appraisal 
commissioner for this local school. For example, the record lacks information regarding the nature of her 
duties in this capacity, the names of individuals she evaluated, and their level of expertise. We do not find 
that that evaluating drama students at a local school is evidence of national or international acclaim. Without 
evidence showing that the petitioner's activities involved evaluating experienced performing arts 
professionals at the national or international level, we cannot conclude she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted several letters of support. We cite representative examples here. 
Chung Long Lo, Executive Director, Institute of Chinese Culture and Arts, New York, states: 
[The petitioner] is one of the best artists in China specialized in Ping Tan, a story telling with music 
instrument playing. This is a unique form of arts originated from Suzhou, China, where [the 
petitioner] is from. This form of arts incorporates singing, performing, music instrument playing, and 
acting to tell full-length stories. . . . [The petitioner] has brought this special art form to a higher 
stage. She is excellent in portraying various characters and plying instruments the perfect way. With 
a systematic training in the number one Ping Tan School of China, she has performed in numerous 
occasions and is greatly loved by her audiences. 
Page 8 
rofessor Emeritus of Chinese, Columbia University, states that he was introduced to the 
petitioner through a mutual friend. He states: 
While [the petitioner] uses mainly the Suzhou dialect in telling her story, her singing, like all singing 
in foreign languages, is more universal in appeal. It is accompanied by her playing of a Chinese lute 
know as pipa. . . . I believe that, while [the petitioner] is doing quite well in China as a performing 
artist, she will get greater personal satisfaction by reaching a more diversified and sophisticated 
audience in the nreat cities of America . . 
" 
does not state that he was aware of the petitioner's reputation as a musician prior to their meeting at 
his home, nor does he identify an original music-related contribution of major significance specifically 
attributable to the petitioner. 
Additional letters of support issued in Chinese (from organizations such as the "Youth Dancing and Singing 
Group of Suzhou Lyrics Group," "Literature Art Union of Jiangsu Province," "China Theater Artists 
Association," "Shanghai Eastern TV Station," "Jiangsu Province Theater Arts Association," and "Suzhou 
Broadcast & Television Station") provide a listing of the petitioner's awards and the places where she has 
performed, but they fail to specifically identify her major, original contributions in the field. None of the 
preceding letters from China include an address, telephone number, or any other information through which 
these organizations may be contacted. Further, we cannot accept these letters as evidence because the English 
language translations accompanying them were not certified as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
3 103.2(b)(3). 
In this case, the letters of support submitted by the petitioner are not adequate to demonstrate that her work 
has had a significant national or international impact. We accept that the petitioner is a talented vocalist and 
musician, but the record lacks independent evidence demonstrating that her contributions have significantly 
influenced her field. For example, there is no evidence showing the extent of the petitioner's influence on 
other professionals in the music industry. The mere fact that the petitioner has performed at cultural events or 
made musical recordings does not demonstrate that such activities are nationally or internationally acclaimed 
as having major significance in the field. Without extensive documentation showing that the petitioner's 
work has been unusually influential or highly acclaimed at the national or international level, we cannot 
conclude that it constitutes a contribution of major significance. Thus, the petitioner has not established that 
she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or mujor trade 
publications or other mujor media. 
The petitioner submitted a copy of a book published in 2004 entitled Suzhou Pingtan - 7heory and Performing. 
The English language translation accompanying this evidence was not certified as required by the regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(b)(3). Without evidence of substantial national or international readership, we cannot 
conclude that this book qualifies as a professional or major trade publication or other major media. Further, 
there is no evidence of the greater field's reaction to this book, or any indication that it is widely viewed as 
significantly influential. Finally, we note that the book was published subsequent to the petition's filing date. 
A petitioner, however, must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(12); see Matter of 
Page 9 
Katigbak at 45. Accordingly, the AAO is not required to consider this book in this proceeding. The petitioner 
has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the display of the alien 's work in thejeld at artistic exhibitions or showcases. 
The petitioner submitted event programs, photographs, and promotional material from numerous 
performances in which she participated as an ensemble member. This particular criterion, however, is more 
appropriate for visual artists (such as sculptors and painters) rather than for than for performing artists such as 
the petitioner. It is inherent to the occupation of musician to perform on stage. In the performing arts, acclaim 
is generally not established by the mere act of appearing in public, but rather by attracting a substantial 
audience. For this reason, the regulations establish separate criteria, especially for those whose work is in the 
performing arts. The petitioner's musical performances are far more relevant to the "commercial successes in 
the performing arts" criterion. 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 a leading or critical role for an organization or establishment with a 
distinguished reputation, the petitioner must establish the nature of her role within the entire organization or 
establishment and the reputation of the organization or establishment. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of her performances with the Suzhou City Pingtan Troupe and the Institute 
of Chinese Culture and Arts of New York. There is no evidence showing that the Institute of Chinese Culture 
and Arts of New York has earned a distinguished national reputation or evidence establishing the relative 
importance of the petitioner's role when compared to that of other performers from this organization. Regarding 
the petitioner's role for the Suzhou City Pingtan Troupe, the petitioner's appellate submission includes a 
"Certificate of Ranking Title" declaring the petitioner a "2nd grade actress" in the Jiangsu Province. As stated 
previously, the petitioner's appellate submission also includes a January 200 1 article in Quyi indicating that at 
least three members of the Suzhou City Pingtan Troupe had earned "first grade" status. The evidence 
submitted by the petitioner is not adequate to distinguish her from other successful members the Suzhou City 
Pingtan Troupe. In this case, we find the petitioner has not established that she performed in a leading or 
critical role for a distinguished organization, or that her involvement has earned her sustained national or 
international acclaim. 
Evidence that the alien hm commanded a high salary or other signijcantly high remuneration 
for services, in relation to others in the$eld 
The petitioner submitted a December 21, 2000 letter issued by the Jiangsu Provincial Society of Culture 
stating that it employed her as a lecturer for compensation of "10,000 yuans RMB per month." The record, 
however, includes no supporting financial documentation (such as payroll records or income tax forms) 
showing the petitioner's actual earnings for any given period of time. Further, the plain wording of this 
criterion requires the petitioner to submit evidence of a high salary "in relation to others in the field." The 
petitioner offers no basis for comparison showing that her compensation was significantly high in relation to 
others in her field. There is no indication that the petitioner earns a level of compensation that places her among 
Page 10 
the highest paid performing artists in the United States or China. Thus, the petitioner has not established that she 
meets this criterion. 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box ofJice receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
This criterion calls for commercial success in the form of "sales" or "receipts"; simply submitting event 
programs, photographs, promotional material, and compact disc recordings indicating that the petitioner took 
part in various performances cannot meet the plain wording of the regulation. The record includes no evidence 
of documented "sales" or "receipts" showing that the petitioner's performances drew record crowds, were 
regular sell-out performances, or resulted in greater audiences than other similar performances that did not 
feature the petitioner. In regard to the petitioner's musical recordings, there is no evidence showing that her 
compact discs had a high national or international sales volume. The petitioner has not established that she 
meets this criterion. 
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. $ 204.5(h)(3). 
The petitioner's appeal was filed on September 26, 2005. The appellate submission was accompanied by 
supporting evidence (which has been addressed in this decision). On the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal to 
the AAO, the petitioner indicated that a brief andlor evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 days. 
As of this date, more than one year later, the AAO has received nothing further. 
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(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. $ 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.