dismissed EB-1A Case: Poetry And Writing

PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration ' 
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. 
u 
jkobert P. Wiernann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-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 is a citizen of Colombia who last entered the United States on December 2, 1999 as a 
nonimmigrant visitor (B2) with authorization to remain in the United States until June 1, 2000. On 
August 17,2004, an immigration judge ordered the petitioner removed from the United States pursuant 
to section 237(a)(l)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 8 1227(a)(l)(B), as 
an alien remaining in the United States beyond the period of his or her authorized stay. The petitioner 
filed the instant petition on February 11, 2005 seeking classification as an employment-based 
immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of 
extraordinary ability in the arts, specifically as a poet and writer. The director determined that the 
petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim requisite to classification 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. Counsel timely filed a motion to reconsider the director's decision. 
The director declined to grant the motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO. Counsel's brief and 
the additional evidence submitted with the motion fail to overcome the deficiencies of the petition and 
the appeal will be dismissed for the following reasons. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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 into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
Specific supporting evidence must accompany the petition to document the "sustained national or 
international acclaim" that the statute requires. 8 C.F.R. 204.5@)(3). An alien can establish 
sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a "one-time achievement (that is, a 
major, international recognized award)." Id. Absent such an award, an alien can establish the 
necessary sustained acclaim by meeting at least three of ten other regulatory criteria. Id. However, the 
weight given to evidence submitted to fulfill the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3), or under 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(4), must depend on the extent to which such evidence demonstrates, reflects, or is 
consistent with sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the alien's field of 
endeavor. 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. 5 204.5(h)(2). 
We address the evidence submitted and counsel's contentions in the following discussion of the 
regulatory criteria relevant to the petitioner's case. Counsel does not claim that the petitioner is eligible 
under any criteria not discussed below. 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or 
awards for excellence in thejeld of endeavor. 
Counsel claims the petitioner meets this criterion because ha work was included on the Poems List of 
the Poetic Babel 2002, conducted as part of the United Nations World Poetry Day celebration and 
sponsored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The 
petitioner submitted a printout fi-om the website of the Italian Commission of UNESCO, which 
includes the petitioner and her poem, "Amar Con Libertad, " "To Love With Freedom," in a list entitled 
'%esie" and contains a profile of the petitioner written in Spanish and an English translation of her 
poem. The petitioner submitted additional printouts from the website of UNESCO, which discuss the 
organization's activities, but include no mention of the Poetic Babel. The record contains a letter fi-om 
which purportedly attests to the importance of the petitioner's recognition by 
the UNESCO Poetic Babel, but the English translation of letter was not certified in 
accordance with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2@)(3). Consequently, we cannot determine whether 
her letter supports the petitioner's claim. Several other support letters submitted with the petition 
purportedly mention the petitioner's recognition by UNESCO, but these letters were also submitted 
with uncertified translations and consequently have no probative value. See 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2@)(3). 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter from Daniele Luca Biolato, Ambassador of the Italian 
Commission to UNESCO, who certifies that the petitioner 
participated with success to 'Poetic Babel 2002' in the occasion of the UN World Poetry Day 
celebration. Italian national Commission for UNESCO - appreciating artistic and moral value 
of her work - was pleased and honoured to include her poem "Amar con libertad" ("To Love 
with Freedom") into 2002 Poems List of the site "Babele Poetica,'' managed by this 
Commission. 
On appeal, counsel states that Poetic Babel is an annual contest hosted by UNESCO that "chooses the 
best poets, by country. . . . Once chosen as the best poet or poetess to represent their country, their 
names appear on the UNESCO Poems List "Babele Poetica." The record does not corroborate 
counsel's statements. Amb. Biolato does not state the selection criteria for including poems in the 
Poetic Babel list and the record contains no other documentation of the parameters, competitiveness or 
Page 4 
significance of this purported award. 
 Without documentary evidence to support the claim, the 
assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof The unsupported assertions of 
counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533,534 (BIA 1988); Matter of 
Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503,506 (BIA 1980). 
Counsel also claims that the petitioner meets this criterion because she received two awards from LiArt 
International, Lncorporated (hereinafter "LiArt"). The petitioner submitted copies of two certificates 
and two letters issued to the petitioner fi-om LiArt and printed in Spanish. These documents were 
submitted with uncertified English translations. Consequently, we cannot determine whether the 
documents support the petitioner's eligibility under this criterion. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3). On 
appeal, the petitioner submits a certified translation of the rules for LiArt's Fourth Literary Contest of 
Stories and Poetry, "New Millennium." While these rules indicate that "New Millennium" is a literary 
contest and not an invitation to be included in an anthology for a fee, as determined by the director, the 
record contains no evidence that the New Millennium awards are nationally or internationally 
recognized. Without such evidence and without certified translations of the petitioner's actual 
certificates and notification letters, the contest rules alone do not demonstrate that the petitioner has 
received awards fiom LiArt or that the awards are nationally or internationally recognized. 
Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet hs criterion. 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which classiJication is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or$elds. 
Counsel initially claimed that the petitioner met this criterion through her membership in the Cove 
Rincon Corporation (hereinafter "Cove Rincon"). The record contains a copy of the petitioner's Cove 
Rincbn membership certificate dated July 1, 2000, four certificates recognizing the petitioner's 
participation in events sponsored by Cove Rindn, and evidence that Cove Rindn is a non-profit 
organization registered in Miami, Florida. 
 The petitioner submitted no documentation of the 
organization's membership criteria. On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter fiom - 
Associate Director of the Latin ~meric& and ~aibbean Center at Florida International Universi 
who confirms that the petitioner was a member of the Board of Directors of Cove Rincon. dh 
explains that the Cove Rincon is "an organization of growing prestige and membership 
both in Miami and Latin America [, whose members] include authors and visual artists. Their monthly 
meetings and their annual gala event take place at this university with our sponsorship." 
On appeal, the petitioner also submits a letter dated June 14, 2005 fi-o- Executive 
Director of Cove Rincon, who confirms that the petitioner served on the organization's Board of 
Directors for three years and explains, "We have certain requirements to be able to be one of our 
Officers, actually, even to be nominated, since the people running for this position are elected once a 
year by our members. . . . We have an image to protect and so we must be careful who represents us." 
lists notable individuals that the organization has worked with and states that, in her opinion, 
Page 5 
the petitioner "has prestige and extraordinary ability in ha field to be able to work hand in hand with us 
in our organization and to deal with individuals of this caliber." 
While the record documents some cultural events organized by Cove Rincon in Miami, the record does 
not establish that this organization requires 
 of its members, as judged by 
recognized national or international experts. 
 Cove Rincon Corp. as an 
organization of "growing prestige and membership" and 
 does not specify the "certain 
requirements" that the organization demands of its officers or its members. Accordingly, the petitioner 
does not meet this criterion. 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in the Jield for which classiJication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The petitioner submitted copies of articles purportedly about her and her work published in Spanish on 
the Cove Rincon website and in various Spanish-language periodicals between 2002 and 2004. All but 
one of these articles were submitted without certified English translations. Without translations 
certified pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. (5 103.2(b)(3), we cannot determine whether the evidence 
supports the petitioner's claim. The single article submitted with a certified translation, "Maria del 
Pilar Casas Flies With Her Own Wings," does not identify its source or date, as required by this 
regulatory criterion. Moreover, the record contains no evidence that the sources of any of the articles 
are professional, major trade publications or other major media. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a certified translation of an article fkom Diario Las Americas about 
the source of one of the previously submitted reports about the petitioner, Florida Exclusive. The 
Diario Las Americas article states that Florida Exclusive "is on its way to excel in the promotion of the 
growing cultural events in the South of Florida - which is another way of expressing the cultural force 
of Hispanic Americans in this region" and that the magazine "reaffirms and gives impetus to the 
cultural activity in Miami." These statements indicate that Florida Exclusive is a regional periodical. 
On appeal, the petitioner also submits a letter from Enrique Cbrdoba, Director of Cita con Caracol 
Radio in Miami, who states that Florida Exclusive is a cultural magazine that "sponsors diverse artists 
from around the world" and is "a meeting place for great talents at a national as well as an international 
level." The record contains no documentation, however, that Florida Exclusive, has a national and/or 
international circulation and the petitioner submitted no other evidence that publication in this 
magazine is consistent with national or international acclaim. Regardless of the magazine's purported 
national or international renown, the record contains no certified translation of the article about the 
petitioner that was published in Florida Exclusive. Hence, the article does not evidence her eligibility 
under this criterion. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(3). 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a certified translation of another article about the petitioner and her 
work published on June 22, 2005 in El Nuevo Herald. We cannot consider this evidence because it 
arose after the petition was filed. The petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing; a petition 
cannot be approved at a future date after the petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See 8 
C.F.R. 5 103.20>)(12), Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45,49 (Comrn. 1971). Even if the article had 
been published prior to filing, we note that the record contains no evidence that El Nuevo Herald is a 
form of major media. On appeal, counsel states that El Nuevo Herald is "a newspaper of major 
circulation in Florida and South America," but counsel submits no documentation of the newspaper's 
circulation or other evidence to support his claim. Again, without documentary evidence to support the 
claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported 
assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. at 534; Laureano, 19 I&N 
Dec. 1; Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. at 506. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet th~s criterion. 
(v) Evidence of the alien 's original scientij?~, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signlJicance in the field. 
Counsel claims that the petitioner meets this criterion through her published books and other writings. 
The record shows that the a book of the petitioner's poetry entitled Volando con Alas Propias was 
published in 2004; that the petitioner co-authored the autobiography of the Cuban writer, Silvia Rok, 
which was also published in 2004; that the petitioner's poetry has been included in anthologies of 
Spanish poetry; that she has written forewords for several books; and that the petitioner has written 
numerous articles that have been published in Florida Exclusive, Miami Exclusive, Iberoamericana 
Internacional, the Cove Rincdn magazine and other Spanish-language publications. However, 
activities which nominally fall under a given regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) do not 
demonstrate national or international acclaim if they are inherent or routine in the occupation itself. 
Frequent publication of a writer's work is inherent and routine to the author's occupation. The record 
in this case does not establish that the petitioner's work has received substantial critical acclaim or has 
been widely recognized as making original, major contributions to her field in a manner consistent with 
sustained national or international acclaim. As discussed above under the third criterion, all but one of 
the media articles about the petitioner and her work were submitted with uncertified translations and 
consequently cannot be considered as evidence of her eligibility. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2@)(3). The 
single article submitted with a certified translation does not state the source or date of its publication, 
hence, we cannot determine if the article reflects sustained national or international acclaim. 
The petitioner also submitted numerous support letters from various individuals. In a letter dated 
October 25, 2004, Carmenza Jararnillo, Consul General of Colombia in Miami, states that the 
Consulate knows of the petitioner's work and that the petitioner: 
has been a writer and a poet and have [sic] represented Colombia with her creations in different 
events and institutions around the world. That [the petitioner] it's [sic] consider [sic] one of the 
must [sic] recognized writers and her different achievements have giving [sic] her the respect 
and admiration of all of those who have follow [sic] her career. 
The Consul General's letter does not, however, discuss the impact of the petitioner's work on her field 
in Colombia or otherwise indicate that she has made original, major contributions to contemporary 
Colombian poetry or literature in a manner consistent with sustained national acclaim. 
Marily A. Reyes, Jaime Valencia, Blanca Esther Pereda and Ricardo Kellerman all praise the 
petitioner's talents and summarize her accomplishments, yet none of these individuals discuss the 
impact of the petitioner's work on her field or otherwise indicate that she has made original 
contributions of major significance to her field in a manner consistent with sustained national or 
international acclaim. The petitioner also submitted letters from Marisol Correa, AnaHilda Garcia, 
Elena Gonzalez Blanco, Luis Javier Claro Pefiaranda, Marcela Pulido Ovalle, Luz Nancy Monroy 
Church, Vicente Torrijos R., Enrique Cordoba, Adnana Herrera Tellez, and Cecilia Cadena Ramos. 
However, because the petitioner failed to submit certified translations of the documents, we cannot 
determine whether the letters support the petitioner's eligibility under this criterion. See 8 C.F.R. 
0 103.2(b)(3). 
The evidence indicates that the petitioner has published her work and has received limited recognition 
in her field. The record does not establish, however, that she has made original, artistic contributions of 
major significance to her field in a manner consistent with sustained national or international acclaim. 
Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the$eld, in professional or major 
trade publications or other major media. 
The record shows that the petitioner has published two books, several forewords to other books and 
numerous articles for various Spanish-language periodicals in the United States. The petitioner's 
poetry has also been published in six anthologies. However, as explained above under the fifth 
criterion, activities which nominally fall under a given regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 0 204.5(h)(3) 
do not demonstrate national or international acclaim if they are inherent or routine in the occupation 
itself As frequent publication of a writer's work is inherent to an author's occupation, publication 
alone does not necessarily satisfy this criterion. The record contains no evidence that the petitioner's 
work has been critically acclaimed or otherwise influenced other writers or artists in Colombia, the 
United States or other countries. As noted above under the third criterion, articles that purportedly 
review and discuss the petitioner's work were submitted without certified translations and consequently 
cannot be considered as evidence of her eligibility. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). The petitioner 
submitted evidence that the New Century Dance Company in Miami performed choreography based on 
her poetry in 2004, but the record does not indicate that this work was critically acclaimed or 
recognized throughout the United States or abroad. While the evidence documents the publication of 
the petitioner's work, it does not establish that her publication record is consistent with sustained 
national or international acclaim in her field. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
Page 8 
Counsel does not claim that the petitioner meets this criterion, but the record contains relevant 
evidence, whch merits brief discussion. In a letter dated May 25, 2005, ~irector 
of Florida Exclusive, states that the petitioner is a writer who is "an integral and essential part of [his] 
staff." hther explains, "[The petitioner] is a key member of our staff and without her 
invaluable collaboration we would surely be lacking a great cultural link at a local and international 
level." while letter attests to the petitioner's critical role as a writer for his magazine, the 
record does not persuasively establish that Florida Exclusive has a distinguished reputation or that the 
petitioner's role at the magazine is consistent with national or international, rather than regional, 
acclaim. Accordingly, the petitioner does not meet this criterion. 
Comparable Evidence Submitted Pursuant to the Regulation at 8 C.F.R. $204.50(4). 
Counsel requested that the testimonial support letters be considered as comparable evidence of the 
petitioner's eligibility pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. §204.5(h)(4). Comparable evidence will 
only be considered when the evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3) "do not readily apply to the 
beneficiary's occupation." 8 C.F.R. §204.5(h)(4). Counsel has not explained or documented why the 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3) do not readily apply to the petitioner's occupation as a poet and 
writer. To the contrary, the record indicates that at least six of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3) 
are applicable to the petitioner's profession. Moreover, we have considered the support letters in our 
discussion of the petitioner's eligibility under the first, second, fifth, and eighth criteria. 
An immigrant visa will be granted to an alien under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1 153(b)(l)(A), only if the alien can establish extraordinary ability through extensive documentation 
of sustained national or international acclaim demonstrating that the alien has risen to the very top of 
his or her field. The record in ths case does not establish that the petitioner has achieved sustained 
national or international acclaim as a poet or writer placing her at the very top of her field. She is thus 
ineligible for classification as an alien with extraordinary ability pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1 1 53(b)(l)(A), and her 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.