dismissed EB-1A Case: Soccer

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20993209 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : AUG . 4, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a soccer 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 although the Petitioner 
satisfied at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria, as required, he did not show his sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrate that he is among that small percentage at the very 
top of the field of endeavor. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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. 
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 sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten 
categories 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 first 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). This two-step analysis is consistent with our holding that the "truth is to be 
determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality," as well as the principle that we 
examine "each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and 
within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably 
true." Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not claimed or established that he received a major, internationally 
recognized award, he must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director determined that the Petitioner met four of the claimed 
evidentiary criteria relating to awards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), memberships at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(ii), published material at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), and leading or critical role at 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 1 However, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not show that he 
garnered sustained national or international acclaim and that his achievements have been recognized 
in the field of expertise, demonstrating that he is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very 
top of the field. On appeal, we will review the totality of the evidence in the context of the final merits 
determination below. 2 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the Director concluded that the Petitioner submitted the requisite initial evidence, we will evaluate 
whether he has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, his sustained national or 
1 In one portion of the decision, the Director listed the evidence relating to the leading or critical role criterion and stated 
that "the submitted evidence does not meet this criterion." However, in discussing the final merits determination regarding 
the leading or critical role criterion, the Director stated that "the record shows that the [Petitioner] has played a critical 
and/or leading role for organizations with a distinguished reputation." Regardless, because the Director concluded that the 
Petitioner satisfied at least three evidentiary criteria, we will evaluate the totality of the evidence in the final merits 
determination. 
2 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
2 
international acclaim, 3 that he is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, 
and that his achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. In a 
final merits determination, we analyze an individual's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the 
evidence to determine if his successes are sufficient to demonstrate that he has extraordinary ability in 
the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also 
Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 4 In this matter, we determine that the Petitioner has not shown his 
eligibility. 
The Petitioner, who is 3 7 years-old, submitted evidence reflecting some successes and attention in 
2015 when he played for thel I of the,__ _____________ 
However, in considering the totality of the evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his 
achievements are reflective of a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as contemplated by Congress. 
H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990). Furthermore, the Petitioner has not shown that he 
garnered sustained national or international acclaim and that he has risen to that small percentage who 
has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2) and (3). 
Based on his resume, the Petitioner played at the youth and amateur level for _______ 
1998 - 2000 winnin the "Vice-champion" in the Brazil x Japan Tournament, and for 
(2000 - 2003), winning the "Vice-champion" at the 4th 
_______ Tournament. The Petitioner also listed several tournaments and events for each 
team. However, the Petitioner did not provide evidence supporting his assertions on his resume, nor 
did he demonstrate the significance of the events. In addition, the record does not reflect that he 
received any acclaim, notoriety, or attention from his participation on these teams during this period. 
According to his resume and screenshots from I I and wikipedia.org, the Petitioner 
professionally played soccer for approximately 15 years for the following teams: 
• I I (2003 - 2005) 
• (2005) 
• (2006) 
• Sport Club (2006 - 2007) 
• Sport Club (2007) 
• SC (2008) 
• Sport Club (2009 - 2010) 
• 2011) 
• 2013 
• (2013 - 2014) 
• FC (2015 - 2016) 
• (2017) 
3 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(A)(1) (stating that such acclaim must be maintained and providing Black's 
Law Dictionary's 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"). 
4 See 6 USC1S Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(B)(2) (instructing that USCIS officers should then evaluate all the evidence 
together when considering the petition in its entirety for the final merits determination, in the context of the high level of 
expertise for this immigrant classification). 
3 
• SC Indoor (2017-2019) 
• Football Team (2018) 
• Arena Soccer (2018) 
Prior to 2013, the record contains minimal, if any, documentation of both his performance and 
subsequent acclaim in the field. According to his resume, thel I Sport Club won the I I State 
Championship in 2007 and I lsc earned Vice-Champion status in 2008. The Petitioner also 
claimed various events for the teams, such as the I State Federation Cup forl I I I in 2006 and thel !State Championship for Sport in 2011. Again, the Petitioner 
did not provide evidence supporting his assertions on his resume, nor did he demonstrate the 
significance of the awards or events. Moreover, the Petitioner did not show how he contributed to the 
teams' successes or how he distinguished himself from the other players reflecting that he was among 
that small percentage at the very top of the field. 5 
During this timeframe, the Petitioner submitted 18 articles mainly about the teams in which he is 
briefly mentioned as a member. Further, the record reflects only two 2007 articles showing substantive 
press coverage of the Petitioner. 6 In fact, the record contains one article from 2004, one article from 
2005, nine articles from 2006, and 7 articles from 2007. Here, the Petitioner has not established any 
media reporting of him in 2003 and from 2008 - 2012. Besides evidence of his employment, the 
record contains no other evidence of his soccer experience from 2008 - 2012, let alone any receipt of 
accomplishments, achievements, or acclaim in this period. 
From 2013 - 2014, the Petitioner indicated that he played for thel I and the 
______ in the United States. The record contains only one article in this period reporting 
that the Petitioner signed with the In addition, the Petitioner indicated that 
the I were "Vice-Champions" in 2014 and submitted a 20141 I Championship medal. The 
Petitioner offered no other evidence relating to his playing experience with the I and did not 
demonstrate any acclaim he received from playing with the 7 He did not, for example, show 
any attention he received or was credited with significantly influencing thel I performance, 
placing him among that small percentage at the top of the field. 
In 2015, the Petitioner's most documented success, he played for the I inl I During 
this time, the Petitioner received the "2015 recognizing the top 11 players in the 
I I In addition, he earned one "Player of the Week" honor and was selected to the 'Team of the 
Week" four times. Further, the chose him as the ________ and the team won the 
I I championship. Further, the Petitioner provided over 30 articles relating to thel lgames 
in which he is mentioned as being a contributor in the respective games, including coverage of his 
awards. In addition, the Petitioner served as captain of the Besides serving as captain for the 
5 The Petitioner submitted screens hots from Wikipedia regarding background information for I Sport 
Club, and Sport Club. Although he also provided photographs and contracts for these teams establishing his 
employment with them, the evidence does not indicate his performances, accomplishments, roles, or otherwise show that 
he garnered any ii.cclaim when he competed for them ----, 
6 See 2007 article from DM Esportes and 12007 article from 0 Popular. 
7 The Petitioner's resume claims that thel I participated in the Cup (2013)" and (2013)." The 
record contains no evidence to support this assertion, nor did the Petitioner show the significance of his performance at 
these events. 
4 
in 2016, the Petitioner provided over ten articles that reported on the games in which he 
was referenced as one of the players in the various games during the season. 
In 201 7, the Petitioner returned to I I to play for I I Although the Petitioner provided 
about eight articles reporting on him signing with the team, the record reflects that he only played in 
two games. Moreover, thel !competed in the second division rather in the country's top 
division. Then in the same year, the Petitioner returned to the United States to play for thel I 
I I in thel !Arena Soccer League. The Petitioner provided two articles reporting on him 
signing with the team. Further, an article from thel I website indicated that the Petitioner played 
in only one game with an injury ending his season. 
In 2018, the Petitioner was selected to the ___________ Team in the 
and served as its captain. The Petitioner submitted an article from the 
website reflecting that the Petitioner "is fully recovered," and indicating that the team 
finished in fourth place. The Petitioner indicated that he has signed a contract with the through 
August 2021. 
As indicated above, the Petitioner has played soccer, both at the amateur/youth and professional levels, 
for approximately 20 years. However, for the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not shown 
that he garnered sustained national or international acclaim and that his accomplishments and 
achievements have placed him among that small percentage at the very top of the field. The 
commentary for the proposed regulations implementing section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act provides 
that the "intent of Congress that a very high standard be set for aliens of extraordinary ability is 
reflected in this regulation by requiring the petitioner to present more extensive documentation than 
that required" for lesser classifications. 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30704 (July 5, 1991 ). Here, the Petitioner 
has not sufficiently documented his soccer career that shows a career of sustained acclaim and meets 
this very high standard. 
Again, the Petitioner garnered some awards in the 2015 season when he played for the However, 
he has not demonstrated how his receipt of these accolades in 2015, without any documented before 
or after, reflects that he "is one of that small percentage who [has] risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor." See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). USCIS has long held that even athletes performing at the 
major league level do not automatically meet the statutory standards for classification as an individual 
of "extraordinary ability." Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953, 954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). 
In addition, the Petitioner demonstrated that he was a member of the 
Team in 2018. However, the Petitioner did not show that his recent single team membership resulted 
in sustained national or international acclaim or reflects "that small percentage who [has] risen to the 
very top of the field of endeavor." See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. §204.5(h)(2) 
and (3). The record, for instance, does not contain media coverage or other evidence showing that he 
received national or international recognition based on his membership with the team. Furthermore, 
the Petitioner did not establish that he distinguished himself from others at the tournament, gaining 
national or international attention in the field. 
Regarding published material about him, the majority of the media coverage represents the 2015 
season, along with some additional, limited reporting for the 2016 season. However, the Petitioner 
5 
did not demonstrate that published material from 2015 - 2106 represents sustained national or 
international acclaim necessary for this highly restrictive classification. See section 203(b )(1 )(A) of 
the Act. Further, the Petitioner did not show that his overall press coverage is indicative of a level of 
success consistent with being among "that small percentage who [has] risen to the very top of the field 
of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). Moreover, the Petitioner did not establish that media reporting 
concentrated in 2015 - 2016 reflects a "career of acclaimed work in the field" or a "very high standard 
... to present more extensive documentation than that required." See H.R. Rep. No. at 59 and 56 Fed. 
Reg. at 30704. 
Moreover, the Petitioner served as captain for the in 2015 and 2016 and for the _____ 
I ITeam in 2018. While we acknowledge that the won a championship in 2015 under 
his leadership, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his role was reflective of, or resulted in, 
widespread acclaim from his field or that he is considered to be at the very top of the field of endeavor. 
See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The Petitioner did not establish that he garnered acclaim or extensive 
recognition from the field based on his leadership, representing sustained national or international 
acclaim or a "career of acclaimed work in the field." See section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act and H.R. 
Rep. No. at 59. 
We note here that the Petitioner provided recommendation letters praising him for his skills and 
abilities. For instanceJ I head coach for the I discussed the Petitioner's "unique 
anticipation method" and "game methodology." Moreover, I retired soccer 
player, opined on the Petitioner's "time abroad and his diverse experience in a range of clubs have 
developed in him a versatility that is most desirable in soccer." Further] l president of the 
indicated that the Petitioner was "an integral player of the successful 2015 team." Although 
the letters commend the Petitioner on his play, they do not contain sufficient information and 
explanation to show that he is viewed by the overall field, rather than by a solicited few, as being 
among the upper echelon or that he garnered recognition on a national or international scale, consistent 
with being among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 Further, the letters 
do not establish that he has made impactful or influential contributions in the greater field reflecting a 
career of acclaimed work in the field, garnering the required sustained national or international 
acclaim. See H.R. Rep. No. at 59 and section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
The record as a whole, including the evidence discussed above, does not establish the Petitioner's 
eligibility for the benefit sought. Here, the Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, 
intended for at the top of their respective fields. See Price, 20 I&N Dec. at 954 ( concluding that even 
major league level athletes do not automatically meet the statutory standards for classification as an 
individual of "extraordinary ability,"); Visinscaia, 4 F. Supp. 3d at 131 (internal quotation marks 
omitted) (finding that the extraordinary ability designation is "extremely restrictive by design,"); 
Hamalv. Dep 't of Homeland Sec. (Hamalll), No. 19-cv-2534, 2021 WL 2338316, at *5 (D.D.C. June 
8, 2021) ( determining that EB-1 visas are "reserved for a very small percentage of prospective 
immigrants"). See also Hamal v. Dep't of Homeland Sec. (Hamal I), No. 19-cv-2534, 2020 WL 
2934954, at *1 (D.D.C. June 3, 2020) (citing Kazarian, 596 at 1122 (upholding denial of petition of a 
8 See 6 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at F.2(B)(l) (providing that letters indicating that a beneficiary is a competent, 
respectable figure within the field of endeavor but the record lacks sufficient, concrete evidence supporting such statements 
do not necessarily show the beneficiary's claimed extraordinary ability). 
6 
published theoretical physicist specializing in non-Einsteinian theories of gravitation) (stating that 
"[c]ourts have found that even highly accomplished individuals fail to win this designation")); Lee v. 
Ziglar, 237 F. Supp. 2d 914, 918 (N.D. Ill. 2002) (finding that "arguably one of the most famous 
baseball players in Korean history" did not qualify for visa as a baseball coach). While the Petitioner 
need not establish that there is no one more accomplished to qualify for the classification sought, the 
record is insufficient to demonstrate that he has sustained national or international acclaim and is 
among the small percentage at the top of his field. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(2). 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated his eligibility as an individual of 
extraordinary ability. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7