dismissed EB-1A Case: Root Carving Art

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
deleted iddm- 
pevent ckarb unw@ 
im"&m of psod 
Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
EAC 05 060 50420 
 Date: HAY 0 1 2008 
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: 
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, Vermont Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal.' On April 11, 2008, the 
petitioner requested that her appeal be withdrawn. The appeal will be dismissed based on its withdrawal by 
counsel. The AAO will also enter a separate administrative finding of fraud and material misrepresentation. 
The petitioner sought 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. 4 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability 
in the arts. Part 6 of the Form 1-140 petition listed the petitioner's job title as "Root Carving Artist." The 
director determined the petitioner had not established that she qualifies for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
On March 14, 2008, in accordance with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
 103.2(b)(16)(i), this office issued a notice 
advising the petitioner of derogatory information indicating that she submitted falsified material in support of 
her petition. The notice specifically observed that the petitioner signed the Form 1-140, thereby certifying 
under penalty of perjury that "this petition and the evidence submitted with it are all true and correct." 
Regarding the falsified documentation and its materiality to these proceedings, the AAO's notice stated: 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii) calls for evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic 
exhibitions or showcases. In support of the petition, you submitted what is alleged to be evidence of 
your "Chinese Root Wood Sculpture Exhibition - 'Dream of Roots"' at the World Journal Gallery in 
Whitestone, New York in January 1999. After further investigation, it has been determined that this 
document pertaining to our exhibition was falsified. You fraudulently substituted your name into an 
artistic promotion for nd misrepresented his biography, achievements, and artwork as 
your own. The AAO was able to obtain the original material at ht~:ll~mmv.n~jpw.org/ev011199.htm 
(accessed on February 27, 20 
 s the document you plagarized and then 
altered by replacing the name " 
By submitting the preceding falsified document and misrepresenting your artistic achievements, you 
have sought to obtain a visa by fraud and willful misrepresentation of a material fact. 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. Id. at 591. 
- -- 
I The petitioner was initially represented by attorney Dennis B. Lan, who submitted a Form G-28, Notice of Entry of 
Attorney or Representative, on appeal. In this decision, the term "previous counsel" shall refer to