dismissed EB-1A Case: Soccer

t 
identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal pnvw 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
[I. S. Citilmshi~ and lmmieration Services 
Office o~~dtnin;slralive A,I&O/S MS 2090 
Washington. l)C 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
AUG 1 2 2010 
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. g: 1 I53(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-2906. Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $585. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen 
Thank you, 
Uea$nk 
/]Perry Rhew 
khief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in athletics pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 I I53(b)(I)(A). The director 
determined that the petitioner had not submitted clear evidence that she would continue to work in her 
area of expertise in the United States. The director also determined that the petitioner had not 
established the requisite extraordinary ability through extensive documentation and sustained national 
or international acclaim. 
Congress set a very high benchmark for aliens of extraordinary ability by requiring through the statute 
that the petitioner demonstrate the alien's "sustained national or international acclaim" and present 
"extensive documentation" of the alien's achievements. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act and 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) states that an alien can 
establish sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement of a 
major, internationally recognized award. Absent the receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines 
ten categories of specific objective evidence. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(i) through (x). The petitioner must 
submit qualifying evidence under at least three of the ten regulatory categories of evidence to establish 
the basic eligibility requirements. 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the ten regulatory categories of 
evidence at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(3) and that she submitted comparable evidence of her extraordinary 
ability pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(h)(4). We acknowledge that the standard of 
proof is preponderance of the evidence, as noted by counsel on appeal. The "preponderance of the 
evidence" standard, however, does not relieve the petitioner from satisfying the basic evidentiary 
requirements required by the statute and regulations. Therefore, if the statute and regulations require 
specific evidence, the applicant is required to submit that evidence. See sections 203(b)(l)(A)(i) and 
(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A)(i) and (ii), and 8 C.F.R. $5 204.5(h)(2), (3), and (5). In this 
case. the documentation submitted by the petitioner failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the 
evidence that she has achieved sustained national or international acclaim, that she is one of the small 
percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor, and that she will continue to work in 
her area of expertise in the United States. For the reasons discussed below, we uphold the director's 
decision. 
I. Intent to Continue to Work in the Area of Expertise in the United States 
The statute and regulations require that the petitioner seeks to continue work in her area of expertise 
in the United States. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A)(ii); 8 C.F.R. 
5 204,5(h)(5). In Part 5 of Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, filed on October 19, 
2006, the petitioner listed her occupation as "Female Soccer Coach." In addition, at the time of the 
filing of her petition, the petitioner submitted a signed statement dated October 4,2006 asserting that 
she "has sustained national and international acclaim and her achievements have been recognized in 
Page 3 
the field of Women's Soccer and she is one of a small percentage of Women Soccer Players and 
Coaches that has risen to the very top of her field." 
In his decision, the director noted that the "Service had requested additional evidence including 
letters from prospective employers; prearranged commitments such as contracts; or a statement 
detailing plans on how she intends to continue work in the U.S," that would confirm the petitioner's 
desire to enter the United States to continue work in the sport of soccer. In response to the director's 
request for evidence. the petitioner provided a March 26, 2007 letter from the Waldorf School of 
Orange County indicating the petitioner would be employed there as a "Games teacher" for the 
2007-2008 school year. The director stated that the submitted documentation did "not adequately 
demonstrate how the petitioner will continue work in the field of endeavor." As such, the director 
found that the record failed to establish the petitioner would continue to work in her area of 
expertise, and that the petition must be denied. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits evidence that an Application for Permanent Employment 
Certification has been filed in her behalf with the U.S. Department of Labor, which identities her job 
title as "Teacher, Movement and Games" and lists her job duties as follows: "Teaches age 
appropriate movement and games. Instructs spatial dynamics. Also, teaches body geography, 
nature, imitation and circle games. Monitors and reports students' progress and development." 
Thus, the record indicates that the petitioner intends to work as a Movement and Games teacher at 
the Waldorf School of Orange County. However, it does not adequately support that she will 
continue to work as a soccer player or soccer coach in the United States. Moreover, even though the 
petitioner evidenced her employment as a teacher in the United States, her work as a Movement and 
Games teacher at the Waldorf School has not been shown to specifically relate to her "extraordinary 
ability" in soccer as either a soccer player andlor a coachiteacher of soccer.' Accordingly, we 
concur with the director's finding that the petitioner has not submitted clear evidence that she will 
continue to work in her area of expertise in the United States. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5). 
11. Law 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
' This interpretation has been upheld in federal court. In Lee v. I.N.S, 237 F. Supp. 2d 914 (N.D. Ill 
2002), the court stated: 
It is reasonable to interpret continuing to work in one's "area of extraordinary ability" 
as working in the same profession in which one has extraordinary ability, not 
necessarily in any profession in that field. For example, extraordinary ability as a 
baseball player does not imply that he also has extraordinary ability in all positions or 
professions in the baseball industry such as a manager, umpire or coach. 
Id. at 918. The court noted a consistent history in this area. 
Page 4 
(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. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service 
(INS) have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals 
seeking immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See H.R. 723 10ISt Cong., 2d Sess. 59 
(1990); 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). 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. 
Id and 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(2). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3) requires that an alien demonstrate his or her sustained acclaim 
and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field. Such acclaim and achievements must be 
established either through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized 
award) or through meeting at least three of the following ten categories of evidence. 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor; 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields; 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or 
other major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is 
sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any 
necessary translation; 
(iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of 
the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification 
is sought; 
Page 5 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contributions of major significance in the field; 
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or 
major trade publications or other major media; 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases: 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations 
or establishments that have a distinguished reputation; 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high 
remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field; or 
(x) Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office 
receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
In 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Ninth Circuit) reviewed the denial of a petition 
filed under this classification, See Kazarian v. UL'iCIS, 596 F.3d 11 15 (9Ih Cir. 2010). Although the 
court upheld the AAO's decision to deny the petition, the court took issue with the AAO's evaluation of 
evidence submitted to meet a given evidentiary ~riterion.~ With respect to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204,5(h)(3)(iv) and (vi), the court concluded that while USCIS may have raised legitimate concerns 
about the significance of the evidence submitted to meet those two criteria, those concerns should have 
been raised in a subsequent "final merits determination." Id. 
The court stated that the AAO's evaluation rested on an improper understanding of the regulations. 
Instead of parsing the significance of evidence as part of the initial inquiry, the court stated that "the 
proper procedure is to count the types of evidence provided (which the AAO did)," and if the petitioner 
failed to submit sufficient evidence, "the proper conclusion is that the applicant has failed to satisfy the 
regulatory requirement of three types of evidence (as the AAO concluded)." Id. at 1122 (citing to 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)). The court also explained the "final merits determination" as the corollary to 
this procedure: 
If a petitioner has submitted the requisite evidence, USCIS determines whether the 
evidence demonstrates both a "level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of 
that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of endeavor," 
8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(2), and "that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim 
and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). Only aliens whose achievements have garnered "sustained 
national or international acclaim" are eligible for an "extraordinary ability" visa. 
8 U.S.C. $ 1153(b)(l)(A)(i). 
Specifically, the court stated that the AAO had unilaterally imposed novel substantive or evidentiary requirements 
beyond those set forth in the regulations at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(vi). 
Page 6 
Id. at 1119-1120. 
Thus, Kazarian sets forth a two-part approach where the evidence is first counted and then considered 
in the context of a final merits determination. In reviewing Service Center decisions, the AAO will 
apply the test set forth in Kazarian. As the AAO maintains de novo review, the AAO will conduct a 
new analysis if the director reached his or her conclusion by using a one-step analysis rather than the 
two-step analysis dictated by the Kazarian court. See Spencer Enter ri~es inc. v. United States, 229 R .. F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), qfd, 345 F.3d 683 (9' Clr. 2003); see also Soltane v. 
DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004) (noting that the AAO conducts appellate review on a de novo 
basis). 
111. Analysis 
A. Major, internationally recognized award 
The implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) states that an alien can establish sustained 
national or international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement, specifically a major, 
internationally recognized award. Given Congress' intent to restrict this category to "that small 
percentage of individuals who have risen to the very top of their field of endeavor," the regulation 
permitting eligibility based on a one-time achievement must be interpreted very narrowly, with only 
a small handful of awards qualifying as major, internationally recognized awards. See H.R. Rep. 
101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6710, 1990 WL 200418 at *6739. 
Given that the House Report specifically cited to the Nobel Prize as an example of a one-time 
achievement, examples of one-time awards which enjoy major, international recognition may 
include the Pulitzer Prize, the Academy Award, and (most relevant for athletics) an Olympic Medal. 
The regulation is consistent with this legislative history, stating that a one-time achievement must be 
a major, internationully recognized award. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The selection of Nobel Laureates, 
the example provided by Congress, is reported in the top media internationally regardless of the 
nationality of the awardees, is a familiar name to the public at large, and includes a large cash prize. 
While an internationally recognized award could conceivably constitute a one-time achievement 
without meeting all of those elements, it is clear from the example provided by Congress that the award 
must be internationally recognized in the alien's field as one of the top awards in that field. 
The petitioner submitted the following as evidence of her one-time achievement: 
1. A brochure for The Portsmouth International Soccer Cup in 1987; The petitioner's initial 
statement, dated October 4, 2006 alleged that she participated in the tournament and placed 
third. 
2. A certificate awarded to the petitioner for Runners Up at the John F. Kennedy Field Hockey 
Tournament in and 
3. A letter from dated September 13, 1996 which thanked the petitioner for her 
work at a summer school and indicated that a check for the petitioner's expenses was 
enclosed. The petitioner's brief indicated that such evidence was support that the petitioner 
is a "member of the Top Clubs in England Ranked Top Five in the World." 
Page 7 
The petitioner claims that she won third place in the 1987 International Soccer Cup as a member of 
the British Women's National Soccer Team. However, the brochure (item 1) that the petitioner 
provided to support this claim failed to confirm the team's win as well as the petitioner's 
participation on the team. Nonetheless, even if the petitioner proved her participation on the team 
and the team's third place award, she failed to establish that the award was a major, intemationally 
recognized award. 
The petitioner also offered a certificate awarded to her for Runners Up at the John F. Kennedy Field 
Hockey Tournament in (item 2), as evidence of a one-time achievement. However, the 
petitioner failed to provide evidence to demonstrate the significance of the competition. Further, we 
agree with the director that participating on a team that placed as a runner up is not indicative of a 
major, internationally recognized award. 
Lastly, the petitioner indicated item 3, a letter from Hockeywise thanking her for work during a 
summer school, supported her claim that she was a "member of the Top Clubs in England Ranked 
Top Five in the World." However, this letter failed to support this claim. In addition, no other 
evidence was provided to substantiate this claim either. Simply going on record without supporting 
documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these 
proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Commr. 1998) (citing Mailer of Treasure 
Craj of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Regl. Commr. 1972)). 
In this case, we agree with the director's conclusion that none of the claimed awards constitute a 
major, internationally recognized award, and that the petitioner's "participation on various soccer 
and field hockey teams as a competitor does not demonstrate acclaim as a coach." In light of the 
above, the petitioner failed to show establish evidence of a qualifying one-time achievement. 
B. Evidentiary Criteria 
The petitioner has submitted evidence pertaining to the following categories of evidence under 
8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3).~ 
Documeniation ofthe ulien's receipr of 1e.sser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or uwardsfor excellence in the.field ofendeavor. 
To fulfill this criterion, the petitioner initially submitted the following evidence: 
1. The evidence discussed above related to a one-time achievement; 
2. A certificate from the Queens Park Rangers (QPR) congratulating various women's soccer 
teams including the Solent Women, dated January 24, 1987, and a page that says 
Congratulations from QPR and signatures on it; 
3 
The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the regulatory categories of evidence not discussed 
in this decision. 
Page 8 
3. Information from The Football Association entitled, "Ladies F.A. Football Leaders Award 
1996," which provides information on a course offered for all "lady managers, youth leaders 
and coaches" and which indicates the petitioner is "staff' for the course; 
4. One page with photocopies of what appears to be the back and front of three metals, one of 
them appears to be a keychain and has been engraved, "Laguna Beach, Soccer Club-1999, 
Annette Parry," one metal is engraved, "Premier Cup, 1999" and another says "Nitemares 
before Christmas Classic 2000," both of the latter metals say "Champion" on the other side. 
As previously noted, the petitioner claims that she won third place in the 1987 International Soccer 
Cup as a member of the British Women's National Soccer Team. However, she did not provide any 
evidence to support this claim. The brochure that the petitioner provided failed to confirm the 
team's win as well as the petitioner's participation on the team. Nonetheless, even if the petitioner 
proved her participation on the team and the team's third place award, she failed to establish that the 
award was a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize or award. A certificate awarded to 
the petitioner for Runners Up at the John F. Kennedy Field Hockey Tournament in 1982 was 
submitted by the petitioner as well. However, the certificate failed to demonstrate the significance 
of the competition or that a Runners Up placement equates to a nationall , or internationally 
recognized prize or award. The petitioner also provided a letter from d, which was 
submitted to support her claim that she was a "member of the Top Clubs in England Ranked Top 
Five in the World." However, this letter failed to support this claim. As aforementioned, going on 
record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden 
of proof in these proceedings. Matter ofSoffici at 165. 
Item 2 was offered to evidence the petitioner's participation on a national women's soccer team in 
England. However, participation on a team does not equate to receipt of a national or international 
prize or award. Further, the awards the petitioner claimed satisfied a one-time achievement, also fail 
to satisfy this criterion. The award for third place in 1987 was not provided and the petitioner failed 
to show any of the awards constituted a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize or 
award. In addition, all of these awards relate to the petitioner's career as a professional soccer, 
which occurred decades ago, and this petition is being sought for her alleged extraordinary ability as 
a coach. 
Counsel indicates this evidence in items 3 and 4 demonstrates that the petitioner has coached 
winning teams. However, item 2 is information regarding a course for which the petitioner teaches 
which is "open to all women with an interest in Association Football." Item 4 confirms that she was 
the coach of a winning team, Laguna Beach, in 1999, but the other medals do not indicate that she is 
the coach. Nonetheless, the petitioner failed to provide any evidence to document the significance of 
the awards so as to establish their national or international recognition. 
In summation, the director found there was insufficient evidence to meet this criterion, and we agree. 
The record fails to demonstrate that any prizes won by the petitioner constitute nationally or 
internationally recognized prizes for excellence in her field, such as supporting evidence showing the 
prestige associated with receiving the awards. The plain language of the regulatory criterion at 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) specifically requires that the petitioner's awards be nationally or internationally 
Page 9 
recognized in the field of endeavor and it is her burden to establish every element of this criterion. 
Moreover, the record even lacks general information about the competitions (such as the award 
criteria or the percentage of entrants who earned some type of recognition). There was also no 
evidence regarding the types of awards presented at all these competitions, how many awards were 
presented and whether the petitioner won the highest award. For example. the petitioner's team 
medals indicated that they were "champions" in different competitions. If each competitor won an 
award at the competition or more important awards were presented at these competitions, these 
prizes would be insufficient to fulfill this requirement. Additionally, many of the competitions 
appear to be regional to Southern California. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Documentation of the ulien'.~ membership in a.~sociation.s in the ,field ,for which 
class~fication is sought, which require outslanding achievements oftheir members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines orfields. 
In order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criteria, 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. Further, the overall prestige of a given association is 
not determinative; the issue here is membership requirements rather than the association's overall 
reputation. 
The petitioner initially submitted 
1. A certificate from The Football Association indicating that the petitioner has attended their 
course for "those who are, or intend to be, concerned with teaching children the techniques 
and fundamentals of Association Football," which was undated; 
2. A certificate from The Football Association indicating that the petitioner attended a 
"Preliminary Coaching Course" at Plymouth University in May of 1995; 
3. A letter from The Football Association's Devon County Coach, dated March 4, 
1999, indicating that the petitioner is "a qualified Football Association Coach and one of the 
few in her profession to attain the FA Preliminary Coaching Badge. This is a prestigious and 
internationally recognized Football Association, which admits as members only those 
individuals who have risen to the top of the field, based on their outstanding achievements;" 
4. A letter from f The F.A. Coaches Association. dated March 2, 1999, which 
states that the petitioner is a "valuable" member of the Woman's Football Association, and 
also indicated that she is a "leading figure of the Worldwide Football Association," which 
"admits as members only those individuals who have risen to the top of their field of 
endeavor based on their outstanding achievements;" 
5. A letter from ~ead Tutor English Hockey Association of The College of St. 
Mark & St. John, dated March 1. 1999 was provided to confirm her membership in the 
Page 10 
English Hockey Association, according to the petitioner's initial brief. However, the letter 
did not specifically indicate whether the petitioner was a member of the English Hockey 
Association. Instead, Mr. stated that he had the "honour of playing hockey in a team 
captained by (the petitioner). She (the petitioner) is truly an inspirational captain 
who sets an exemplary standard for every member of the team;" 
6. A certificate from the California Youth Soccer Association (CYSA) - South indicating that 
the petitioner has attended and successfully completed a "Course for Soccer Coaching" in 
1999; 
7. A certificate from the CYSA - South indicating that the petitioner has attended and 
successfully completed a "Course for Soccer Coaching" in 2001; 
8. A copy of a "Risk Management Badge" from CYSA - South which indicates that the 
petitioner is a coach, license level E, and that the badge expires on December 6,2006; 
9. A webpage from \%vrn.coastsocccr.com indicating that m~\\\..coachsoccer corn is a 
"communications center of the Coast Soccer League" and that the league has 26,000 players 
who participate in it. 
10. A letter from of ~mateur Athletic Foundation (AAF), dated September 5, 
2001, thanking the petitioner (however, the letter was addressed to Dear Coaching Instructor) 
for attending the soccer coaching program and also requesting various documents for them to 
consider employing the petitioner as an instructor; 
11. A job description for the AAFICIF instructors; 
12. A schedule of the 2001 AAFICIF Basic Soccer Clinic Schedule; 
13. An AYSO Schedule for an lntermediate Clinic and a list of "Saturday Skills;" 
14. A certificate from the YMCA indicating that the petitioner has successfully completed the 
course requirements for "YMCA Super Sports Director," dated May 7, 2001; 
15. A certificate from the YMCA indicating that the petitioner has successfully completed the 
course requirements for "YMCA Day Camp Director," dated April 14, 2001 ; 
16. A YMCA bulletin listing the petitioner as a Program Director for Community Programs; and 
17. A Certificate of Appreciation from the YMCA presented to the petitioner for 1 year of 
service. 
The petitioner also provided internet pages from The Football Association's website with some 
information regarding the organization and about football (soccer) in general. However, the website 
pages did not include any details regarding its membership requirements. The petitioner also 
provided a certificate of membership, dated July 22, 1994, from The Institute of Leisure and 
Amenity Management, and a certificate of professional development, dated October 3 1, 1994, for 
her completion of a leisure and recreation management course in response to the RFE. 
Items 1, 2, 6, 7, 14 and 15, as well as the certificate for the petitioner's completion of a leisure and 
recreation management course, all demonstrate the petitioner's completion of various courses. Items 
8, 10, 11 and 17 evidence the petitioner's certifications or service as a coach. Item 5 does not 
specifically state that the petitioner is a member of any organization. Further, item 9 is meant to 
accompany items 7 and 8, providing information regarding the organization that provided courses 
and certifications to the petitioner. Similarly, items 12 and 13 are schedules for various soccer 
courses, and are not relevant to the petitioner's membership in any association. Item 16 just notes 
Page 1 1 
the petitioner's position at the YMCA. As such, none of this evidence equates to the petitioner's 
membership in an association. 
The petitioner, however, did provide evidence of her membership, in the form of reference letters, in 
The Football Association (item 3), the Women's Football Association (item 4) and the English 
Hockey Association (item 5). In addition, the petitioner provided a certificate of membership in The 
Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management. However, the record lacked evidence (such as 
membership bylaws or official admission requirements) showing that any of the groups require 
outstanding achievements of its members. The petitioner also failed to provide any evidence 
demonstrating that membership is judged by recognized national or international experts in the field. 
As such, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in projkssional or major trade publications or other 
major media, relating to the alien's work in the,field,fir which classification is sought. 
Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author qfihe material, and uny necessary 
translation. 
In general, 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. Some newspapers, such as the New York Times, nominally serve a particular locality but 
would qualify as major media because of significant national distribution, unlike small local community 
4 papers. 
To fulfill this criterion, the petitioner submitted the following evidence: 
1. An article from The Tustin News entitled "Tustin Hi h girls soccer finds help from 'across 
the pond,"' without a date, written by d 
2. Two additional pages from The Tustin News, one which has a picture of two Tustin High 
soccer players, captioned "Soccer Hug," which references the following page entitled "A 
Kick in the Pants" consisting only of a photograph as well. Neither of the "articles" include 
any text, other than a caption, or an author, but the second page is dated January 13,2000; 
3. An article without a source entitled, "Soccer2Day:akes Her Mark" without 
an author or a date: 
4. An article from Tustin Weekly entitled, "Late goal keeps Tillers from winning Golden West 
match," dated January 14, 200 and written by - 
- 
4 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, for 
instance, cannot serve to spread an individual's reputation outside of that county. 
Page 12 
6. A partial article from Tustin Weekly, without a title since it was a continued article and the 
petitioner failed to submit the first page, dated January 28, 2000, without an author regarding 
the team; 
7. An article from Tustin Weekly entitled, "Tiller girls capture first league soccer win," dated 
February 4,2000 and written by about the team; 
8. An article from Tustin Weekly entitled, "Tustin girls soccer starts to make a mark," dated 
February l I, 2000 and written by about the team; 
9. An article from Tustin Week1 entitled, "Tustin girls drop final in soccer," dated February 18, 
2000 and written by Y 
10. An article without a source entitled "LB Girls Hope To Play in Hawaii," dated April 21, 2000 
and without an author; 
11. A "President's Welcome" from The Post (Orange County Women's Soccer League News), 
dated February 2003; 
12. A brochure from Mission Viejo Elite SC (MVSC) 22"* lnvitational Tournament with a 
picture of the petitioner with a group of other people (presumably coacheslno caption) that 
does not mention the petitioner, without a date; 
13. Another brochure page from MVSC, without a title, author, date, which is not about 
petitioner, although her picture appears to be in the brochure despite the lack of a caption 
indicating the persons in the photograph; 
14. An article from Parenting Magazine, May 2005, entitled "When Dads Coach" written by 
where petitioner was quoted; 
15. A page from Parenting Magazine 's website regarding the publication; and 
16. An article from Goal, the Coast Soccer League's Magazine, entitled ~akes 
Her Mark in Southern California," without a date. 
The petitioner accompanied the last article (item 16) with a page from the East Coast Soccer 
League's website which provided some information about the league, not the magazine. 
This criterion specifically requires a title, date, and author, as well as a translation where necessary, for 
the published materials provided as evidence. The petitioner failed to adhere to these requirements. 
The petitioner's evidence did not include a title in items 6 and 13. No dates were provided for items I, 
2, 3, 12, 13 and 16. Likewise, the names of authors were not included in items 2, 3,6, 10 and 13. 
Moreover, many of the articles submitted by the petitioner were not written primarily about her. In 
large part, the articles were about the teams in which the petitioner coached. Some examples of 
these articles that only briefly mention the petitioner or fail to mention her all together include items 
2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14. These articles fail to conform to the plain language of this 
regulatory criterion that requires the published materials to be "about the alien." 
Finally, the evidence attempting to show that any of the preceding arlicles submitted by the 
petitioner were printed in professional or major trade publications or some other form of major media 
is also problematic. Many of the articles appear in regional papers in Southern California rather than 
major media. Regional coverage or coverage in a publication read by only a small segment of a 
country's total population is not considered major media. While the petitioner did provide 
Page 13 
information regarding Parenting Magazine, because the article from this publication was not about 
the petitioner, but rather about fathers who coach children, it cannot be considered for this criterion 
as it is not about the petitioner relating to her work. 
Similarly, the petitioner failed to provide the source of the article for item 3. As the petitioner was 
unable to provide independent evidence indicating a source, she was therefore also unsuccessful in 
proving such article was published in professional or major trade publications or other major media. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's participation, either individual(v or on a panel, as u judge cf the 
work r?f'others in the same or an ullied,field of specificalion jOr which classification is 
sought. 
The petitioner submitted two certificates signed by her and the Principal at Tustin High School in 
2000 reflecting that her players "participated in "Varsity" and "Junior Varsity" athletics and were 
recognized for their "outstanding contribution and dedication to the team." Coaching members of 
one's team does not equate to judging the work of others in the field. Providing instruction and 
training to players is not tantamount to presiding over a competition and determining the winner in 
the same manner as a judge, for instance. We agree with the director that the petitioner, who claims 
eligibility solely through performing her routine responsibilities as a coach, failed to demonstrate 
that she has participated as a judge of the work of others in her field in order to fulfill this criterion. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien S original scientrjc, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contrihulions of major significance in thejeld. 
The petitioner submitted various reference letters, which we will consider to support this criterion. 
The petitioner submitted a a Member of the US Soccer's Coaching Staff, 
dated February 18,2008. Mr. that the petitioner is: 
[A]n individual of extraordinary ability, based upon her critical coaching of 
championship-winning soccer teams and her original contributions to soccer 
coaching. Ms. recognition by leading soccer coaches clearly establishes her 
to be an extraordinarily accomplished coach. 
The petitioner also provided an internet page from \vww.isi~hotos.com that indicates ~r.- 
was the USA assistant coach with his picture at the Four Nations Cup practice. An LA Galaxy press 
release, dated December 15, 2005, which noted that ~r.was promoted to the top assistant 
spot, was also provided. In addition, the petitioner provided a schedule for a clinic in 2001 where 
both she and ~r.s~oke. The etitioner also provided an internet page from the "Coaches 
Bench" which indicates that Mr. was a Head Coach for the Coaches Bench. a professional 
Page 14 
player for the Glasgow Rangers, a Head Club Coach for Mission Viejo and a Staff Coach for LA 
Galaxy. 
~r.s letter fails to provide specific examples of the petitioner's impact or to explain how 
the petitioner is recognized by leading coaches as a coach for youth soccer. In addition, although the 
petitioner confirmed her participation in the 2001 clinic with ~r. she failed to evidence 
how this represents a contribution of major significance. 
The petitioner also provided a letter from Director of The Soccer Education 
Academy, dated February 25,2002. ~r.stated that the petitioner has: 
[Clontributed greatly to our [his] soccer academy, as well as to soccer in general in 
Orange County. As an example, recently organized one of the largest soccer 
clinics in Tustin, California where hundreds of kids attended for three days to 
improve their skills. 
Mr. also noted that the petitioner assisted him in the Soccer Education Academy's own 
training programs, as well as with two of his books. A letter fro-dated March 1999, of 
the University College of St. Mark and St. John, stated that the petitioner "contributed significantly 
to the field by combining her knowledge and love for the sport and her experience in sports 
development to create innovative sports programs for youth hockey." ~ikewise,from 
South Dartmoor provided a letter explaining that the petitioner "single-handedly created this (a) new 
role which has been emulated by other aspiring sports colleges" which develops partnerships 
between various entities including the College and the community. In addition, the petitioner 
submitted letters fro- and from the Football Association of England. 
Again, while the petitioner appears to have assisted in the production of Mr. =s book, the 
above-referenced statements by Mr. fail to show exactly what contribution the petitioner 
made to his book. Further, the petitioner's alleged authorship of scholarly articles in the field is more 
relevant to the criteria under 8 C.F.R. 6 204,5(h)(vi), and this evidence will be analyzed later in this 
decision with respect to that criteria. In addition, Mr. Is claims that the petitioner has 
developed an innovative sports program for youth hockey also lack the specificity and details 
necessary to distinguish her program from other youth hockey programs. Similarly, ~r.- 
claims that the petitioner created a new role at South Dartmoor falls short of explaining how such 
role was a contribution of major significance that impacted the field. For instance, he did not specify 
the other schools who emulated this role or how many schools created such a role. 
The petitioner also submitted an article from The Tusrin News, which was previously submitted for 
the criterion under 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(iii), entitled "Tustin High girls soccer finds help from 'across 
the pond."' The petitioner explained that this article was relevant because it described the important 
role the petitioner played in improving Tustin High School's soccer team. The petitioner also refers 
to the article from Parenting Magazine in May 2005, entitled "When Dads Coach," however, this 
article does not provide any insight into contributions made by the petitioner, it merely quotes her. 
The article from Goal. the Coast Soccer League's Magazine, entitled Makes Her 
Page 15 
Mark in Southern California," was accompanied by a page from the East Coast Soccer League's 
website which provided some information about the league, but not the magazine. 
To satisfy the criterion relating to original contributions of major significance, the petitioner must 
demonstrate not only that her work is novel and useful, but also that it had a demonstrable impact on her 
field at the national or international level or other commensurate evidence. 
In this case, the petitioner failed to submit preexisting, independent evidence of original 
contributions of major significance. While the letters highly praise the petitioner and provide some 
examples of her coaching, they fail to specifically identify how her contributions have influenced the 
field, and therefore to establish that she has made contributions of major significance in her field. 
In this case, the recommendation letters are not sufficient to meet this regulatory criterion. The 
opinions of experts in the field, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a 
successful claim of sustained national or international acclaim. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as 
advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 
I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Commr. 1988). However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final 
determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters 
from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate 
the content of those letters as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795-796. 
Thus, the content of the writers' statements and how they became aware of the petitioner's reputation 
are important considerations. Even when written by independent experts, letters solicited by an alien 
in support of an immigration petition are of less weight than preexisting, independent evidence that 
one would expect of a coach or player who has made original contributions of major significance. 
Without supporting evidence showing that the petitioner's work equates to original contributions of 
major significance in her field, we cannot conclude that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the,fit.ld, in profes.siona1 or 
major trade puhlicalion.~ or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted the following evidence for this criterion: 
1. A recommendation letter from from The Soccer Education Academy, dated 
February 25, 2002, which indicates that the petitioner offered him "valuable assistance in 
finishing" his book and manual, mentioning that there are also pictures of the petitioner and her 
team in both publications; 
2. Pages from s book, none of which specifically identify the petitioner as an author 
or contributor; 
3. A page from The Cbnnection, South Dartmoor Community College Newsletter, from September 
1997 with a biography of the petitioner as a "new member(s) of staff' and no author indicated; 
4. An article from The Connection, South Dartmoor Community College Newsletter, from January 
1998, entitled "Getting to Grips with the Job of Sports Development," written by the petitioner; 
and 
Page 16 
5. A page from The Connection, South Dartmoor Community College Newsletter, from June 1998 
with an two articles written by the petitioner, "Sports Development in the Community" and 
"Sports College 'Membership' Scheme." 
In his letter, Mr. stated that the petitioner offered him "valuable assistance" with his book 
and manual and that her pictures with her soccer team are rominent in both of his publications. The 
petitioner also provided the first page of one of Mr. 4's books entitled. "Soccer fbr Everyone." 
We agree with the director that the petitioner does not satisfy this criterion. With regard to items 1 
and 2, the petitioner has failed to show that she authored any part of Mr.'s book or manual. 
Mr. only broadly referenced her contribution to his publications as "valuable assistance." 
Further, there is no evidence to support either of Mr.'s publications constitute professional 
or major trade publications or other major media. Likewise, the petitioner failed to establish that The 
Connection, the publication in which the petitioner's articles appeared (items 4 and 5), is a 
professional or major trade publication or other major media. Moreover, item 3 does not contain an 
author, and therefore, the petitioner did not prove that she wrote this article. 
As such, 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. 
The petitioner submitted the following evidence to support this criterion: 
1. A reference letter from Principal of South Dartmoor Community 
College, dated March 1, 1999, which indicates that the petitioner was the college's 
"first ever Sports Development Officer;" 
2. A flyer calling for student participation at an event entitled, "South West Sports 
Colleges: Festival of Sport" on October 22, 1998, that the petitioner and the Director 
of Physical Education and Sports for the college appear to have organized; 
3. Two letters from Devon County Coach, that confirm the petitioner assisted 
in holding a Coaching Certificate Course; 
4. The Mission Statement of the Waldorf School of Orange County in Costa Mesa, 
California; 
5. A photograph that indicates the petitioner was a member of the Waldorf School of 
Orange County Staff from 2001 to 2002; 
6. A photograph that indicates the petitioner was a member of the Waldorf School of 
Orange County Staff from 2002 to 2003; 
7. A photograph that indicates the petitioner was a member of the Waldorf School of 
Orange County Staff from 2003 to 2004; 
8. A letter from Director of Development at the Waldorf School of Orange 
County, dated March 6, 2002, confirming that the petitioner donated to the "Family 
Giving Campaign;" 
Page 17 
9. An announcement or letter, undated, without a source and without an author specified 
that the petitioner appears to have written, discussing an after school sporting event that 
she appears to have organized; 
10. A bulletin. dated March 5, 2003, regarding the events at the Waldorf School of Orange 
County with information regarding the Capital Campaign; 
11. Two flyers for Sports Enrichment Camp at the Waldorf School, which appear to be 
organized by the petitioner because her name is listed at the bottom of the page as the 
contact person; 
12. A flyer requesting donations for the "Capital Campaign;" 
13. A letter from the petitioner, which is not addressed to anyone, discussing a 7Ih and 8Ih 
Grade Track Meet on March 28,2003, which reported the events of the day; 
14. A letter from the petitioner, again not addressed to anyone, discussing Waldorf s 5Ih 
Grade Greek Pentathlon in Santa Barbara on May 9,2003; 
15. A bulletin, dated April 28, 2004, regarding the events at the Waldorf School of Orange 
County; 
16. A school handout from the petitioner regarding the 7Ih and 8Ih Grade Track and Field 
Event in Santa Barbara; 
17. A thank you note from the students of the Waldorf School for helping with a fundraising 
event; 
18. A press release, dated March 22, 2005, regarding the 7Ih and 8~ Grade Track and Field 
Event in Santa Barbara with a quote from the petitioner providing information about the 
event; 
19. A bulletin dated May 4, 2005 regarding the events at the Waldorf School of Orange 
County; 
20. A handout regarding the 5" Grade Pentathlon from the petitioner, indicating her title is 
"games teacher;" 
21. A flyer for a May Faire arts event on May 14; 
22. Two of the same flyers for "The Company of Angels," a Waldorf School Community 
Store; 
23. Two of the same reports from the petitioner regarding the Medieval Games on May 16, 
2005; 
24. A bulletin dated Mary 25,2005 regarding the Waldorf School's events; 
25. A fl er for "The All England Soccer Academy 1999 Soccer Camp" directed by = 
which lists the petitioner as one of the coaches; 
26. A flyer for the "U.K. International Soccer Camps Community Day Programs," and what 
appears to be pictures of the petitioner coaching possibly at one of those programs; 
27. A flyer for the "Laguna Beach Soccer Club," with try out information which does not 
appear to mention the petitioner; 
28. A flyer for a Sports Enrichment Program, which the petitioner appears to organize as her 
name is listed as a contact person; 
29. A flyer for a Middle School Campus Program at the YMCA for the Fall of 2000; 
30. A training certification indicating that the petitioner successfully completed the course 
requirements for "YMCA Super Sports Director," dated May 7,2001; 
Page 18 
31. A certificate of appreciation presented to the petitioner for one year of service to the 
YMCA. without a date; 
32. A training certification indicating that the petitioner successfully completed the course 
requirements for "YMCA Day Camp Director," dated April 14,2001; 
33. A photograph of the petitioner holding a microphone on a field presumable for some 
YMCA event, without any caption; 
34. A flyer for Soccer2Day's "Team Camps," directed by the petitioner in 2002; 
35. A presentation or brochure for Soccer2Day, indicating that the petitioner is its founder 
and director accompanied by her biography, and providing information regarding its 
vision, mission, and values; 
36. The petitioner's resume; 
37. A flyer for the Elite Partnership Program; 
38. A flyer for a TermiWeek Sports Program, which appears to be organized by the 
petitioner as she is listed as the contact person: and 
39. Reference letters from various individuals. 
A letter from a Member of the US Soccer's Coaching Staff, dated February 18,2008, 
stated that the petitioner's "recognition by leading soccer coaches clearly establishes her to be an 
extraordinarily accomplished coach." The petitioner also provided a letter from 
Director of The Soccer Education Academy. dated February 25. 2002. Mr. a 
petitioner "organized one of the largest soccer clinics in Tustin, California where hundreds of kids 
attended for three days to improve their skills." Lastly, the petitioner also provided letters from 
of the Football Association of England and from of the University College 
of St. Mark and St. John. 
The most applicable evidence that the petitioner provided for this criterion was item 1, a letter from= 
. In his letter, he stated that the petitioner's "post was created in a pioneering move to 
develop partnerships between the College, the community and the National Governing Bodies" and 
that this position "has been emulated by other aspiring sports colleges," presumably to show that the 
petitioner played a leading role at South Dartmoor. However, most of the evidence submitted by the 
petitioner evidenced her organization of various events as the games director at the Waldorf School 
(e.g., flyers sent home to parents, handouts, etc., items 2, 8, 9, 10, 11-24, 28, 29, 33. 34. 37, 38 all 
represent such evidence). The petitioner also provided information, including items 3, 25 and 27 
(although she is not specifically referenced here), that confirms that she acted as a coach for various 
camps and other programs. The petitioner also provided materials to regarding an organization that she 
founded (items 34 and 35), Soccer2Day. However, there was no information regarding her 
responsibilities as a founder and what she has specifically accomplished with this organization. 
The director found that the petitioner failed to satisfy this criterion, and we agree. In order to establish 
that the petitioner 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. There was no 
evidence that indicated what the petitioner's responsibilities were within any of the organizations for 
which she worked. Similarly, there is no evidence demonstrating how the petitioner's role 
Page 19 
differentiated her from others where she worked. For instance, the petitioner did not submit evidence 
such as an organizational chart which would demonstrate her position within the organization in relation 
to others. Mere title, without specific information regarding actual duties or explanation of relevance or 
importance of that position within the hierarchy of the organization's management is not sufficient to 
establish the petitioner's leading or critical role. Therefore, while the petitioner may have proven that 
she provided valuable services to her employers, she has failed to support the proposition that she has 
performed a leading or critical role for those organizations. 
Lastly, the evidence further lacks proof that the schools and programs for which the petitioner was 
employed by had "distinguished reputations." There was limited independent information to 
demonstrate each organization's standing or reputation. 
As such, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salury or other signijkuntly high 
remuneralion,for services, in relation lo others in the field. 
In counsel's brief, he argued that the petitioner is "one of the few individuals in the field of Women's 
Soccer who earns their income by teaching and practicing what they most love, the art of coaching, 
educating and playing Soccer." The petitioner provided her 2007 W-2 Form photocopied on the bottom 
of an employment letter, indicating that she earns $46.500 per year as the Waldorf School's "Games 
teacher," and the 2006-7 Compensation Package for the Waldorf School of Orange County which 
confirms the same. The plain language 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 other school teachers. 
Counsel argues that the petitioner's salary "is nearly 20% more than the USDOL level IV [highest] 
average salary in the region" for the occupational classification of "Coaches and Scouts." The 
submitted evidence from the Waldorf School showing the petitioner's salary and earnings, however, 
relates to her employment as a school teacher rather than a soccer coach. Moreover, it is noted that the 
petitioner must show a high salary compared "to others in the field," not just in one particular region. 
Counsel indicated that the salary information came from USDOL On-Line Wage Survey and provided 
the corresponding URL address, yet did not provide the web pages with this information. As 
aforementioned, simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient 
for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter qfSoffici at 165. Based on 
counsel's unsubstantiated claim we accessed DOL Bureau of Labor Statistics at 
http:lIwww.bls.~ovloes!2008/ma~!oes27~022.ht1n now incorporated into the record of the 
proceedings. The wage tables show that highly paid Coaches and Scouts earn $62,660 or more 
annually. 
In this case, the petitioner has failed to submit evidence demonstrating that she commands a high salary 
in relation to others in her field. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that she meets this criterion. 
Page 20 
Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or 
record, cassette, compact disk, or video su1e.s. 
The petitioner provided evidence that she coached various girls' soccer teams, including plaques 
thanking her for being the coach, lists of team names and coaches, and pictures of the petitioner with 
her teams. The petitioner also provided brochures for various trainings that she provided. In his 
brief, counsel conceded that this criterion is not applicable to the "field of athletic coaching." 
In his decision, the director found that the petitioner had not met this criterion. We agree that the plain 
language of the criterion requires evidence of commercial success in the performing arts. As no claim 
has been made that the petitioner's field involves the performing arts, the petitioner cannot satisfy this 
criterion. 
Even if the category were expanded to include commercial success in all fields, this regulatory criterion 
calls for evidence of commercial successes in the form of "sales" or "receipts." The record does not 
include evidence of documented "sales" or "receipts" showing that the petitioner achieved 
commercial successes in the performing arts. 
Accordingly, the petitioner failed to establish that she meets this criterion. 
Summary 
In this case, we concur with the director's determination that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate 
her receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, or that she meets at least three of the ten 
categories of evidence that must be satisfied to establish the minimum eligibility requirements 
necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
C. Comparable Evidence 
On appeal, counsel argues that the reference letters, as well as other evidence previously submitted 
on the petitioner's behalf, should be considered as comparable evidence of her extraordinary ability. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(4) allows for the submission of "comparable evidence" only if 
the ten categories of evidence "do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation." The regulatory 
language precludes the consideration of comparable evidence in this case, as there is no evidence 
that eligibility for visa preference in the petitioner's occupation cannot be established by the 
categories of evidence specified by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). In fact, counsel's 
appellate submission specifically addresses half of the preceding regulatory criteria. Where an alien 
is simply unable to meet three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3), the plain language 
of the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(4) does not allow for the submission of comparable 
evidence. 
Nevertheless. there is no evidence showing that the documentation the petitioner requests 
reevaluation of as comparable evidence constitutes achievements and recognition consistent with 
Page 2 1 
sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field. We note that the petitioner's 
reference letters have already been addressed under the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
While reference letters can provide useful information about an alien's qualifications or help in 
assigning weight to certain evidence, such letters are not comparable to extensive evidence of the alien's 
achievements and recognition as required by the statute and regulations. The nonexistence of required 
evidence creates a presumption of ineligibility. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(2)(i). The classification sought 
requires "extensive documentation" of sustained national or international acclaim. See section 
203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The 
commentary for the proposed regulations implementing the statute provide 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). Primary evidence of achievements and 
recognition is of far greater probative value than opinion statements from individuals selected by the 
petitioner. 
D. Final Merits Determination 
In accordance with the Kuzuriun opinion, we must next conduct a final merits determination that 
considers all of the evidence in the context of whether or not the petitioner has demonstrated: (1) a 
"level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the 
very top of the[ir] field of endeavor," 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2); and (2) "that the alien has sustained 
national or international acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of 
expertise." Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). See also Kuzariun, 596 F.3d at 
11 19-1 120. In the present matter, many of the deficiencies in the documentation submitted by the 
petitioner have already been addressed in our preceding discussion of the regulatory criteria at 
8 C.F.R. 5 204,5(h)(3). The submitted documentation relates primarily to the petitioner's 
achievements as a coach for youth soccer teams. The submitted evidence, however, is not indicative 
of the petitioner's national or international acclaim and there is no indication that her individual 
achievements have been recognized in the field. 
With regard to the evidence submitted for the prizes and awards criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(i), 
most of the "awards" provided were received in the late 1990's, more than a decade after this 
petition was filed. The plain language of statute and of the controlling regulation requires the 
petitioner to demonstrate that his national or international acclaim has been sustuined. See section 
203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A)(i), and 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The submitted 
evidence is not consistent with sustained national or international acclaim. 
Regarding the evidence submitted for the published material criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iii), we 
have already noted several deficiencies with the proffered evidence. 
With regard to the regulatory criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(iv), the petitioner submitted two 
certificates signed by her and the Principal at Tustin High School in 2000 stating that her players 
"participated" in "Varsity" and "Junior Varsity" athletics and were recognized for their "outstanding 
contribution and dedication to the team." The director found that the petitioner's recognition of 
Page 22 
players under her tutelage was inherent to her coaching position and indicative of "competency" 
rather than national or intemational acclaim. We concur with the director's finding. There is no 
supporting evidence documenting the significance of these recognition certificates or the process of 
their distribution to students. The petitioner has not established that her involvement in recognizing 
players participating on the high school team for which she coached is commensurate with sustained 
national or international acclaim at the very top of her field. Rather, the petitioner's involvement 
simply reflects her performance of local coaching duties inherent to her position at Tustin High 
School. 
The evidence provided to demonstrate that the petitioner made contributions of major significance in 
her field pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3)(v) was insufficient as previously examined. In addition, 
the petitioner failed to support that she is recognizable outside of the small regional area of Orange 
County. For example, a letter from Mr. indicated that the petitioner "contributed greatly to 
our [his] soccer academy, as well as to soccer in general in Orange County" and that she "organized 
one of the largest soccer clinics in Tustin, California." Both examples do not illustrate that she has 
national or international acclaim, but only regional recognition. 
The conclusion we reach by considering the evidence to meet each criterion separately is consistent 
with a review of the evidence in the aggregate. Even in the aggregate, the evidence does not 
distinguish the petitioner as one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(2). 
E. Prior 0-1 Nonimmigrant Visa Status 
While USCIS has approved a prior 0-1 nonimmigrant visa petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, this 
prior approval does not preclude USCIS from denying an immigrant visa petition based on a different, 
if similarly phrased standard. Each case must decided on a case-by-case basis upon review of the 
evidence of record. It must be noted that many 1-140 immigrant petitions are denied after USCIS 
approves prior nonimmigrant petitions. See, e.g., Q Data Consulting, Inc. v. INS, 293 F. Supp. 2d 25 
(D.D.C. 2003); IKEA US v. US Dept. ($Justice, 48 F. Supp. 2d 22 (D.D.C. 1999); Fedin Brothers 
(b. Ltd a! Suva, 724 F. Supp. 1103 (E.D.N.Y. 1989). Because USCIS spends less time reviewing I- 
129 nonimmigrant petitions than 1-140 immigrant petitions, some nonimmigrant petitions are simply 
approved in error. Q Dara (bnsuliing, Inc. v. INS, 293 F. Supp. 2d at 29-30; see ulso Texas A&M 
Univ. v. Upchurch, 99 Fed. Appx. 556,2004 WL 1240482 (5th Cir. 2004) (finding that prior approvals 
do not preclude USCIS from denying an extension of the original visa based on a reassessment of 
the alien's qualifications). 
The AAO is not required to approve applications or petitions where eligibility has not been 
demonstrated, merely because of prior approvals that may have been erroneous. See, e.g., Mafter of 
Church Scientology Iniernafional, 19 I&N Dec. 593, 597 (Comm. 1988). It would be absurd to suggest 
that USCIS or any agency must treat acknowledged errors as binding precedent. Sussex Engg Lid. v. 
Montgomery, 825 F.2d 1084,1090 (6th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1008 (1988). 
Page 23 
Furthermore, the AAO's authority over the service centers is comparable to the relationship between a 
court of appeals and a district court. Even if a service center director has approved a nonimmigrant 
petition on behalf of the alien, the AAO would not be bound to follow the contradictory decision of a 
service center. Louisianu Philharmonic Orchestra v. INS, 2000 WL 282785 (E.D. La.), ufd, 248 F.3d 
1139 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 122 S.Ct. 51 (2001). 
IV. Conclusion 
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 and 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. Further, the petitioner has not submitted clear evidence demonstrating that she will continue to 
work in her area of expertise in the United States. Therefore, the petitioner has not established her 
eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the petition may not be approved. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be 
denied by the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the 
initial decision. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d at 1043, affd, 345 
F.3d at 683; see also Soltune v. DOJ, 381 F.3d at 145 (noting that the AAO conducts appellate 
review on a de novo basis). 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the 
benefit sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Here, 
that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed