dismissed EB-1A Case: Table Tennis

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 4687466 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : NOV. 27, 2019 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a table tennis player , seeks classification as an alien 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 that although the 
Petitioner satisfied three of the initial evidentiary criteria, in which he must meet at least three, he did 
not show his sustained national or international acclaim and demonstrate that he is among the 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) 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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner competed in table tennis events in Nepal and Australia. Because the Petitioner has not 
indicated or established that he has 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). 
In denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner fulfilled three of the initial 
evidentiary criteria, awards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), published material at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii), and judging at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv). On appeal, the Petitioner argues that he 
meets two additional criteria. 
We have reviewed all of the evidence in the record and conclude that it does not support a finding that 
the Petitioner meets the requirements of at least three criteria. Although the record reflects that the 
Petitioner received nationally and internationally recognized awards and garnered media coverage 
satisfying the awards and published material criteria, for the reasons discussed later, we do not concur 
with the Director's decision relating to the judging criterion. In addition, for the explanations 
discussed below, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he fulfills any additional criteria. 
Documentation of the alien 's membership in associations in the field for which 
class[fication is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
The Petitioner claims eligibility for this criterion based on membership with the~------~ 
I I. In order to satisfy this criterion, the Petitioner must show that membership in the association 
is based on being judged by recognized national or international experts as having outstanding 
achievements in the field for which classification is sought. 1 
1 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form I-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADJ 1-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html (providing an example of admission to membership in 
the National Academy of Sciences as a Foreign Associate that requires individuals to be nominated by an academy 
member, and membership is ultimately granted based upon recognition of the individual's distinguished achievements in 
original research). 
2 
At initial filing, he provided a letter from! I who indicated that the Petitioner 
"was selected through trial from the competitive grou: of nominees in our club in the year of 2009." 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted a letter from I ~ . I sports journalist, who stated that 
LJprovided the Petitioner "with several chances to be the part of the club as a professional tennis 
player." Further, the Petitioner reseTed three newspaper articles covering table tennis matches that 
mentioned his membership with 
The Director found that the evidence did not show the membership requirements forD let alone 
that outstanding achievements are required for membership, as judged by ycognird national or 
international experts. As such, the Director requested the Petitioner to submit constitution or 
bylaws discussing the membership requirements. In response, the Petitioner provided a copy ofD 
I Is letter, two media articles mentioning him as part of c=] in table tennis competitions, two 
award certificates listing him as a member of D and a sporting event credential indicating his 
affiliation with~ 
While the documentation reflects his membership withe=] the Petitioner did not establish thatD 
requires outstanding achievements, as
1 
judge! by recognized national or international experts. 
Moreover, the Petitioner did not provre constitution or braws or other evidence showing the 
membership requirements for Furthermore, I did not include specific, detailed 
information elaborating on the "select[ion] through trial" procedure. Finally, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that recognized national or international experts judge the outstanding achievements of 
I lprospective members. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not show that he meets this criterion. 
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 
class[fication is sought. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) 
The Director found that the Petitioner fulfilled this criterion. This regulatory criterion requires a 
petitioner to show that he has acted as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of 
specialization. 2 For the reasons outlined below, the record does not reflect that the Petitioner 
submitted sufficient documentary evidence demonstrating that he meets this criterion, and the 
Director's determination on this issue will be withdrawn. 
The record reflects that the Petitioner submitted certificates and documents showing his participation 
as an "umpire" or a "referee" at table tennis competitions. 3 However, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that the position of a table tennis umpire, referee, or judge involves evaluating or judging 
the work or skills of competitors as opposed to enforcing the rules of a match and ensuring 
sportsmanlike competition. Moreover, the record lacks other evidence, such as official competition 
rules for the tournaments listed on the certificates or for table tennis in general, showing that serving 
as an "umpire" or "referee" in this instance equates to participating as a "judge" of the work of others. 
Without further documentation, such as evidence that he awarded points or exercised his judgment in 
2 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 8. 
3 Some of the documents contain "(Judge)" next to "umpire" or "referee." 
3 
choosing the ultimate winner, evidence regarding officiating at matches is insufficient to meet this 
criterion. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he participated as a judge of 
the work of others consistent with this regulatory criterion. Accordingly, we withdraw the decision of 
the Director for this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii). 
The Petitioner argues that he performed in a critical role for c=] 4 Regarding a critical role, the 
evidence must demonstrate that a petitioner has contributed in a way that is of significant importance 
to the outcome of the organization or establishment's activities. It is not the title of a petitioner's role, 
but rather the performance in the role that determines whether the role is or was critical. 5 
Moreover, the Petitioner contends that the Director only discussed a letter fro~ l acting 
director for thel I and specifically points to the previously indicated letter from 
I I As it relates tol l's letter, he summarized the Petitioner's accom lishments 
in table tennis tournaments and events and briefly stated that the Petitioner "also played for and 
is highly recommended for his brilliant performance in Table Tennis." Regarding.__ ___ _. he 
claimed that the Petitioner "is recognized as an extraordinary~ as compared to other players in 
the club team and he has played a vital role in making the L__J as the number one club of the 
country." 
The letters, however, do not contain specific, detailed information supporting their opinions. 6 For 
instance,! ldid not describe how the Petitioner's "brilliant performance" contributed to the 
overall success or standing ofO Moreover,! I did not elaborate on how the Petitioner is 
an "extraordinary player as compared to other players" or how his performances resulted inl I 
ranking. Further, repeating the language of the statute or regulations does not satisfy the petitioner's 
burden of proof Fedin Bros. Co., Ltd. v. Sava, 724 F. Supp. 1103, 1108 (E.D.N.Y. 1989), affd, 905 
F. 2d 41 (2d. Cir. 1990); Avyr Associates, Inc. v. Meissner, 1997 WL 188942 at *5 (S.D.N.Y.). 
Although the letters confirm the Petitioner's membership withLJthey do not contain detailed, 
probative information demonstrating the critical nature he performed for I I Again, while the 
previously discussed articles indicate his performances in table tennis tournaments, they do not show 
how the Petitioner played an essential role for Ooverall. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner did not establish that ~ enjoys a distinguished reputation. 7 The 
Petitioner argues that 'I ldistinguished reputation is an admitted matter," and "[i]ts athletes are 
4 The Petitioner does not claim, nor does the record reflects, that he performed in a leading role forD 
5 Id. 
6 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 10 (stating that letters from individuals with personal 
knowledge of the significance of a petitioner's leading or critical role can be particularly helpful in making this 
determination as long as the letters contain detailed and probative information that specifically addresses how the role for 
the organization or establishment was leading or critical). 
7 See USCTS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005 .1, supra, at 10-11 ( defining Merriam-Webster's Dictionary definition of 
4 
selected as Nepal's representatives to international tournaments such as thd !Games andl~-~ 
~ _ _.!Games." Although the Petitioner broadly refers to media articles of table tennis tournaments, 
he does not identify documentation to support his~ions. In fact, the record contains only one 
article posted )n m1pub lica.org indicating that L_J '"succeeded to get the most (three) players 
selected for the Games." 8 However, the Petitioner did not establish that having three players 
selected for th Games is sufficient to showl I distinguished reputation. In addition, while 
I !claimed that~ is "Nepal's most prestigious club," he did not further elaborate or 
support his opinion with detailed information. Here, the Petitioner did not include evidence, for 
example, showing the overall field's view ofc=] how its reputation compares to other table tennis 
clubs, or how its successes or accomplishments relates to others, signifying a distinguished reputation 
consistent with the regulatory criterion. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner did not establish that he satisfies this criterion. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or 
documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria. As a result, we need not provide the type of final 
merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. Nevertheless, we advise that we 
have reviewed the record in the aggregate, concluding that it does not support a finding that the 
Petitioner has established the acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought. 
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 of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of his athletic work is indicative of the required sustained national 
or international acclaim or that it is consistent with a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )(l)(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in the field, and he is one of the small percentage who has risen to 
the very top of the field of endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
Although the Petitioner has successfully competed in table tennis events and received some press 
coverage, the record does not contain sufficient evidence establishing that he is among the upper 
echelon in his field. 
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. 
"distinguished" as marked by eminence, distinction, or excellence). 
8 If it is the Petitioner's intention that other media articles support his claims, he does not specify the articles. 
5