dismissed EB-1A Case: Taekwondo

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 15, 2024 In Re: 32495743 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a taekwondo instructor, 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 the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner met the initial evidence requirement for this classification through 
evidence of either a major, internationally recognized award or that he meets at least three of the 
evidentiary criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 
8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability, a petitioner (or anyone on the 
petitioner's behalf) must establish that they: 
• Have extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics; 
• Seek to enter the United States to continue work in their area of extraordinary ability; and that 
• Their entry into the United States will prospectively substantially benefit the United States. 
Extraordinary ability must be demonstrated by evidence of sustained national or international acclaim 
as well as extensive documentation that their achievements have been recognized in the field. Section 
203(b)(l) of the Act. 
The implementing regulation further states that 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." A 
petitioner can demonstrate that they meet the initial evidence requirements for this immigrant visa 
classification through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized 
award). If such evidence is unavailable, then they must alternatively provide evidence that meets at 
least three of the ten listed criteria, which call for evidence about lesser awards they may have received, 
published material about them in qualifying media, and their authorship of scholarly articles, among 
other types of evidence. 8 C.F.R. §§ 204.5(h)(2),(3). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination, assessing whether the record shows that the 
individual possesses the acclaim and recognition required for this highly exclusive immigrant visa 
classification. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 20 l0) ( 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); Rijalv. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a taekwondo athlete, referee, and instructor who has received several medals as a 
competitor in tournaments since 2009. He intends to continue working as a referee and instructor in 
the United States. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated 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 concluded that the Petitioner met one of the evidentiary 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), relating to his participation as a judge of the work of others in 
his field. We agree with the Director's determination for this criterion. On appeal, the Petitioner 
asserts that he also meets the evidentiary criteria relating to lesser nationally and internationally 
recognized awards, membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement, and published 
material about him and his work in the field. After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we 
conclude that he does not meet at least three of the evidentiary criteria. 
We note that in his initial filing as well as when responding to the Director's request for evidence 
(RFE), the Petitioner described his field of endeavor as taekwondo, while listing his proposed 
employment as "taekwondo master instructor and school owner" on Form I-140, Immigrant Petition 
for Alien Workers. Much of the evidence in the record pertains to his career as an athlete, with a 
comparatively smaller portion evidencing his activities as a taekwondo instructor and a referee. 
However, competitive athletics and coaching rely on different sets of skills and in general are not in 
the same area of expertise. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.2(A)(2), www.uscis.gov/policy­
manual. Where, as in this case, a petitioner has been coaching for an extended period of time, we will 
place the heaviest weight on evidence relating to their achievements as a coach. Id. 
2 
Documentation ofthe alien 's receipt oflesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field ofendeavor. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) 
To meet this criterion, a petitioner must establish that they have received prizes or awards, which were 
granted for excellence in their field of endeavor, and that the prizes or awards are nationally or 
internationally recognized in their field of endeavor. Here, the Petitioner submitted certificates, 
photographs of himself receiving medals at competitions, and letters from the Nepal Olympic 
Committee and other organizations which demonstrate that he received several gold, silver, and bronze 
medals as a taekwondo athlete. 
The Director concluded in her decision that the record lacked clear pictures of the medals claimed to 
have been received by the Petitioner, and so was insufficient to verify that he actually received them. 
But the plain language of this criterion calls for documentation of awards received without requiring 
a particular type of evidence, and in this case the certificates, photographs, and verifying letters from 
several organizations together are sufficient to show that the Petitioner received the awards he claims. 1 
The letters mentioned above describe some of the taekwondo events at which the Petitioner competed. 
For example, a letter from the K-I-T-C- indicates that he won two gold medals at tournaments 
organized by this association, and that the tournaments included over 600 and 362 international 
competitors, respectively, in 2019 and 2020. Although these figures show that those tournaments did 
not limit the competitors in number or nationality to the extent that the excellence of the competitors 
was reduced, the fact that competitors from different countries competed at the tournaments does not 
establish that the awards granted were internationally recognized. The record does not include 
evidence showing the prestige or importance of these and other tournaments in which the Petitioner 
medaled within the field of taekwondo, particularly within the framework of top-level international 
competition, or that the awards granted received attention or recognition within the field at the national 
or international level. We further note that the Petitioner does not differentiate in his brief between 
the recognition afforded to awards he received at locally organized tournaments versus those from 
tournaments organized by or between national associations. 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner references a letter from the dojang in Nepal where he worked as an 
instructor which states that the students trained by the Petitioner "won the most gold medals and silver 
medals among other school competitors." However, this criterion requires evidence of the Petitioner's 
receipt of prizes or awards, not those he instructed, and the evidence does not indicate that he was 
awarded for the success of his students. 
For all of the reasons discussed above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he 
meets this criterion. 
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) 
1 The Petitioner also provides clear pictures of his medals with his appeal. 
3 
To meet this criterion, a petitioner must establish that they are a member in an association, that the 
association is in their field of endeavor, that it requires outstanding achievements of its members, and 
that the requirement for outstanding achievements is judged by recognized national or international 
experts in their fields. 
The Director noted in her decision that the record includes photocopies of several identification cards 
which show the Petitioner's membership in taekwondo associations, as well as his promotion to the 
fourth and fifth dan taekwondo levels. 2 But the Director concluded that the record did not establish 
that these associations require outstanding achievements of their members. 
On appeal, the Petitioner refers to a letter from the Nepal Taekwondo Association (NTA) that his 
receipt of the fifth dan black belt "is internationally recognized and signifies a high degree of 
proficiency and expertise." When making a determination under this criterion, we look to evidence 
of the requirements for the level of a petitioner's membership. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual 
F.2(A)(2), www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. Although the Petitioner has established his membership in 
the NT A, the record does not show that his taekwondo dan is equivalent to his level of membership in 
that association, especially considering that the dan was awarded by a different association, the World 
Taekwondo Headquarters (WTH). The record does not sufficiently document the levels of 
membership in the NT A or the WTH, or the requirements for those levels of membership. 
The Petitioner also references a letter from the USA Masters Team which states that he has been a 
"supporting member" since 2021. While the letter speaks of the Petitioner's activities, qualifications, 
and personal character, it provides no information regarding the membership requirements for a 
supporting member. 
Per the above, the Petitioner has not established that any of the associations for which he provided 
evidence of membership require outstanding achievements for his level of membership. He has 
therefore not established that he meets this criterion. 
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 
necessa,y translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii) 
To meet this criterion, a petitioner must submit evidence of published material that is about them and 
relates to their work in their field of endeavor. The material must include the title, date, and author 
information, and must be published in a professional or major trade publication or other major 
medium. Also, in compliance with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), materials in a foreign 
language must be accompanied by a certified English translation. 
2 We note that the Petitioner achieved the fifth dan after the filing of his petition. Eligibility must be established at the time 
of filing. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.2(b)(l ), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg'l Comm'r 1971 ). A petition cannot 
be approved at a future date after the petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts. Matter ofIzummi. 22 I&N Dec. 
169, 175 (Comm'r 1998). That decision, citing Matter ofBardouille. 18 I&N Dec. 114 (BIA 1981), further provides that 
USCIS cannot "consider facts that come into being only subsequent to the filing of a petition." Id. at 176. We will 
therefore not consider this evidence on appeal. 
4 
The Petitioner submitted several articles from newspapers and websites based in Nepal, some of which 
are about him and his career in taekwondo and others which did not mention him or only reported the 
results of competitions. In her decision, the Director concluded that the submitted evidence did not 
meet several of the elements of this criterion. Specifically, she noted that articles published in media 
the Petitioner identified as Annapurna Post, Annapurna National Daily and www.nepalmala.com did 
not include the names of the authors, and that the letter from the editor of Annapurna Post Daily 
concerning the circulation of Annapurna National Daily was insufficient to establish that it was a 
qualifying medium under this criterion. 
On appeal, the Petitioner does not address the missing author information for any of the published 
materials submitted. He also does not contest that any of the media in which the articles about him 
were published are professional or major trade publications or other major media, except for the 
Annapurna Post. The Petitioner first refers to the editor's letter noted above, but we note that there 
are inconsistencies regarding which media are referred to in that letter. The editor begins the letter by 
stating that he writes on behalf of the Annapurna National Daily, a newspaper which he states has a 
daily circulation of 225,000. He then goes on to list five articles which he states appeared in the 
newspaper, all in 2022. But two of these are described by the Petitioner as having been published in 
the Annapurna Post, and in four of the articles the website address www.annapurnapost.com appears 
in the page header. Further, the writer of the letter lists his title below his signature as Chief Editor, 
Annapurna Post Daily, which appears to be an amalgam of the names of the two newspapers. The 
Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies in the record with independent, objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). As neither the 
editor's letter nor the Petitioner explains any relationship between these two newspapers, it is not 
apparent to which of them the circulation figures stated by the editor apply. 
In addition, the Director concluded that the circulation figures alone were insufficient to establish that 
the newspapers qualified as major media. On appeal, the Petitioner submits new evidence from 
www.wikipedia.org about the Annapurna Post. Where, as here, a Petitioner has been put on notice of 
a deficiency in the evidence and has been given an opportunity to respond to that deficiency, the AAO 
will not accept evidence offered for the first time on appeal. Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764 
(BIA 1988); Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 1988). The Petitioner was notified of the 
types of evidence which could be submitted in support of this criterion in the Director's RFE, and was 
given the maximum allowable period to respond with additional evidence. 
For all of the reasons given above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established that he meets 
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 have reviewed 
the entire record and conclude that it does not establish that the Petitioner has the acclaim and 
recognition required for the classification sought. 
5 
The Petitioner seeks a highly restrictive visa classification, intended for individuals already at the top 
of their respective fields, rather than for those progressing toward the top. USCIS has long held that 
even athletes performing at the major league level do not automatically meet the "extraordinary 
ability" standard. Matter ofPrice, 20 T&N Dec. 953,954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of his 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. l 0 1-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990); see also section 203(b )( 1 )(A) 
of the Act. Moreover, the record does not otherwise demonstrate that the Petitioner has garnered 
national or international acclaim in his field, and that he is one of the small percentage who have 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). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6