dismissed EB-1A Case: Soccer

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 18, 2024 InRe: 31286116 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a soccer (football) player, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A). This first 
preference classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their 
extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have 
been recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner satisfied 
the initial evidentiary requirements for this classification but did not establish, as required, that he has 
sustained national or international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the very top of his 
field. The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 
203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability if: 
(i) the [ noncitizen] 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 [noncitizen] seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the [noncitizen's] entry into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate recognition 
of their achievements in the field through a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally 
recognized award). If the petitioner does not submit this evidence, then they must provide sufficient 
qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material in certain media, and 
scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). 
( discussing a two-part review where the documentation is fust counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination); see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a former professional football player who has played with the I_______ 
as well as multi le first division football clubs in Chile, Ar entina, and S ain. 1 He played in the 2014 
During his career 
he has played on teams winning the 2012/2013 and 2015/2016), thel I 
(2015), thel 1(2015), and the (2011). 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
As the Petitioner has not indicated or established that he has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, he must demonstrate that he meets the initial evidence requirements by satisfying 
at least three of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Petitioner claimed that he could 
meet four of these criteria, and the Director agreed. Specifically, the Director concluded that the 
Petitioner satisfied the criteria related to lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards, 
memberships in associations that require outstanding achievements, published materials in major 
media, and performance in a leading or critical role for organizations that have a distinguished 
reputation. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii), (iii), and (viii). 
Because the Petitioner demonstrated that he met the initial evidence requirements , the Director 
proceeded to a final merits determination. In a final merits determination, the Director must analyze 
all of a petitioner' s accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine if their 
successes are sufficient to demonstrate that they have extraordinary ability in the field of endeavor. 
As noted above, in a final merits determination, the Director looks at whether the record shows 
sustained national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small 
1 The record reflects that the Petitioner retired from professional football in 2023. 
2 
percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2) and (3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 2 
B. Final Merits Determination 
The Director concluded that the record, as a whole, did not establish that the Petitioner garnered 
sustained national or international acclaim and that he has risen to that small percentage at the very 
top of the field of endeavor. The Director noted that the majority of the Petitioner's evidence of 
national or international acclaim focused on his career from 2011 to 2015, but he did not show that 
this acclaim was sustained. The Director further noted that the record does not establish that the 
Petitioner consistently received major media coverage commensurate with sustained national or 
international acclaim, outside of his achievements from 2011 to 2015, or that the media coverage he 
received from 2011 to 2015 "reflects a 'career of acclaimed work in the field."' 
In determining whether a petitioner has enjoyed sustained national or international acclaim, we 
consider that such acclaim must be maintained. See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(A)(l) , (stating that 
such acclaim must be maintained and providing Black's Law Dictionary definition of "sustain" is "to 
support or maintain, especially over a long period of time ... To persist in making (an effort) over a 
long period of time"). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director conducted "an overly subjective analysis with 
inconsistent conclusions," and disregarded evidence. Specifically, the Petitioner states that the 
Director disregarded evidence of his receipt of the 20121 Iaward from the Chilean Football 
Federation, his membership in the Chilean Football Federation and on the _______ and 
his leadership role with the and two other first division teams. The Petitioner 
asserts that the Director's focus on "consistency of media coverage" was incorrect because "sustained 
media coverage does not necessarily equate to continuous coverage but rather reflects the ongoing 
interest and recognition garnered during key milestones." In support of his claim to be at the "very 
top of the field," the Petitioner submits additional recommendation and support letters, and a document 
titled "Work Model: Soccer for Everyone." 
The Petitioner first asserts that the Director did not consider his membership in the Chilean Football 
Federation or on the _______ as evidence of his outstanding achievements. However, 
the Director specifically mentioned the Petitioner's membership on thel Iin 
several places. She concluded that he had established membership in an association which requires 
outstanding achievements, and that he performed in a leading or critical role for an organization with 
a distinguished reputation. She also considered this membership in her final merits determination 
analysis. 
The record includes evidence that the Petitioner was a member of the Chilean Football Federation for 
various periods from July 1999 to November 2022, based on his role as a football player for first 
division teams. However, the record does not include information about the criteria for membership 
to support that this demonstrates the Petitioner's sustained acclaim. The record does not demonstrate 
that membership in the Chilean Football Federation is based on an outstanding achievement beyond 
2 See also 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
3 
being a player for a Chilean football club. Nor does it demonstrate that membership requires sustained 
acclaim over any period of time. 
The Petitioner references a letter from ___________ of the Chilean Football 
Association, dated April 4, 2023. The letter lists the Petitioner's sporting achievements from 2011 to 
2016, his receipt of the I I award in 2012, and states that he "was a fundamental part of the 
squad that in 2015 won theI Ifor the Chilean Federation." The letter from Mr. 
I Idoes not provide other details about membership criteria. Nor does the letter establish the 
Petitioner's sustained national or international acclaim. Rather, the letter praises the Petitioner's 
achievements as a football player for specific events and for a specific period of time. 
The Petitioner next asserts that the Director did not consider his 20121 I award in analyzing 
his sustained acclaim. In her decision, the Director specifically discusses the I I award, 
stating, "While the award reflects institutional recognition for excellence, it does not reflect national 
or international recognition for excellence in the field. The record does not contain any evidence to 
indicate that this award is recognized beyond the ... institution on a national or international level." 
eal, the Petitioner submits a letter dated October 10, 2023, from director 
of , in support of his assertion that the l __ 
award demonstrates sustained acclaim. Mr.I I states that the Petitioner "is recognized for 
his outstanding career in past editions of the I Iespecially in 2011 where 
he was captain and key member in obtaining the title." The letter does not mention the I I 
award. Other evidence in the record describes the I I award as "recognition of the best 
footballer of the year." The Petitioner does not explain how having received this award once in 2012 
demonstrates his sustained acclaim. 
The Petitioner also asserts that the Director did not give full consideration to the Petitioner's roles with 
various football teams in supporting his sustained national and international acclaim. In her decision, 
the Director acknowledged the Petitioner's roles with each football team and determined that the 
record did not demonstrate "that the Petitioner contributed in a way that is of significant importance 
to the outcome of [the teams'] activities." In analyzing the final merits, the Director determined that 
the record did not establish "that these teams were among those achieving success at the highest levels 
of the competition, or that [the Petitioner's] individual performance elevated him to the same status as 
athletes successfully competing at the highest international level." 
Ini support of his assertion that his role as a player on several football teams demonstrates his sustained 
acclaim, the Petitioner references a letter dated March 15, 2023, from Mr. 
states that he has been technical director of professional football at various football 
clubs from 1996 to 2019, and of the ______ from 2021 to 2022. The letter states that 
the Petitioner is a "great professional and an excellent person." However, the letter does not 
specifically address the Petitioner's acclaim as a football player or discuss the Petitioner's roles with 
any of teams. Further, based on the dates Mr. I I states that he worked with each 
football club, it appears that he only worked with the Petitioner for one year, from 2014 to 2015, while 
the Petitioner played for 
4 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits two additional letters ofrecommendation. A letter dated November 
29, 2023, from I I head coach ofl Iin Major League Soccer, praises the 
Petitioner as a skilled player. An unsigned letter dated November 7, 2023, from I I
I I former President of the I I also praises the Petitioner's talent and career as 
a professional football player. 3 However, the Petitioner does not explain how either letter 
demonstrates his sustained acclaim. The letter from Mr. I I mentions the Petitioner's specific 
achievements in 2015 and 2016 but does not address his achievements outside of this time frame. The 
letter from former President! Idoes not discuss how the Petitioner maintained his acclaim 
over any period of time. 
The Petitioner also submits a document titled "Work Model: Soccer for Everyone," outlining an 
educational model for teaching football. The document is undated and does not identify its author. 
The Petitioner does not reference this document in his brief on appeal, nor does he explain the 
probative value of this document in demonstrating his sustained acclaim. 
As noted above, in determining whether a petitioner has enjoyed sustained national or international 
acclaim, we consider that such acclaim must be maintained. Upon review of the totality of the 
evidence, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner here has not demonstrated sustained national 
or international acclaim to demonstrate that he is among the small percentage at the very top of the 
field of endeavor and has not established eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability. 4 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for individuals progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held 
that even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter ofPrice, 20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the recognition of his work is indicative of the required sustained national or 
international acclaim required by section 203(b)(1 )(A) of the Act or demonstrates a "career of 
acclaimed work in the field" as contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 
1990). Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner is one of the small 
percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
3 The record includes a certified English translation of this letter, as well as the original in Spanish. The original letter in 
Spanish does not contain any signature. Additionally, the "Certificate of Translation" attesting to the translator 's fluency 
in Spanish and English is dated May 26, 2023, almost five months before the date of the letter. The Petitioner must resolve 
inconsistencies with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 
591-92 (BIA 1988). 
4 As the Petitioner has not established his extraordinary ability under section 203(b)(1 )(A)(i) of the Act, we need not 
consider whether he will continue to work in his area of extraordinary ability under section 203(b)(1 )(A)(ii) of the Act. 
Accordingly, we decline to reach and hereby reserve this issue. See INS v. Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) ("courts 
and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); 
see also Matter ofL-A-C- , 26 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an 
applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
5