dismissed EB-1A Case: Writing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8771264 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG . 12, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a writer and author, 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 Petitioner had 
satisfied only two of the initial evidentiary criteria, of which she must meet at least three. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability if: 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate sustained 
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then he or she must provide sufficient qualifying documentation that meets at least three of the ten 
categories listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i) - (x) (including items such as awards, published material 
in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner indicates employment as a "literary non-fiction writer and business/commercial writer." 
Because the Petitioner has not established that she has received a major, internationally recognized 
award, she must satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)­
(x). 
The Director found that the Petitioner submitted evidence relating to seven of the ten initial evidentiary 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) but established that the Petitioner fulfilled only two criteria, relating 
to membership in associations at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) and published material at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iii). For the reasons discussed later, we do not concur with the Director's decision 
relating to the membership and published material criteria. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that she meets two additional criteria.1 After reviewing all the 
evidence in the record, we conclude that the Petitioner does not establish that she satisfies the 
requirements of at least three criteria. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Documentation of the alien's membership in assoc1at1ons 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. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii). 
The Petitioner argues that she satisfies this criterion based on membership with The Federation of 
Hong Kong Writers (TFHKW). In order to fulfill 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.2 The Director 
1 We note that the Director determined that the Petitioner initially submitted evidence related to lesser nationally or 
internationally recognized awards at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), leading or critical roles criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(viii), and high salary at 204.5(h)(3)(ix), but did not satisfy these criteria. The Petitioner does not contest 
these issues on appeal and therefore we deem them to be waived. See, e.g., Matter of M-A-S-, 24 l&N Dec. 762, 767 n.2 
{BIA 2009). 
2 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form 1-140 Petitions; 
Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual {AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADll-14 6 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
2 
determined that that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the 
followin reviousl submitted evidence establishes that she meets this criterion:,ill..fill..!J,ndated letter 
from.____ __ ___,.. _______ ............,HKW; (2) a March 2019 letter froml__J(3) a March 
2019 letter from.__ __ .---____ ____., TFHKW· and 4 a 2019 Chinese Ian ua e article from 
an unidentified source b ~--~ titled ' '-------------------~ Reviewed in its totality, the evidence does not demonstrate that membership 
in TFHKW requires outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international 
experts in the Petitioner's field or discipline. Because the record does not reflect that the Petitioner 
established eligibility under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii), we will withdraw the findings 
of the Director for this criterion. 
Regarding the letters froml I in her undated letter she confirms the Petitioner has been a member 
of TFH KW since I I 2013 and asserts that the federation is "an exclusive association for 
established writers who have already published two books and gained outstanding achievements in 
the field of literature." In her letter dated March 2019j I provides "the minimum requirement to 
be considered by the committee for admission into the organization is to be referred by two existing 
members, have articles published frequently and regularly in major literary newspapers or magazines, 
have published books and are recognized widely for the quality of publications and talent in writing." 
She indicates that when those minimum requirements are met, "the committee extensively reviews the 
applicant's writing, body of work, and their influence and impact on the literary landscape of Hong 
Kong and China, at large." Finally, she claims that the association "accepted [the Petitioner's] 
application due to her achievement in winning the championship of.__ _____ ~ Literary 
Awards, her publications in major literary magazines and newspapers and the quality of the books she 
wrote." She further provides that "the committee members unanimously recognized that [the 
Petitioner] had already had significant original contribution to the literary landscape in Hong Kong." 
L-----------r~f_T~F~H~K~W~=n-=-ihief editor ofl I magazine, indicates 
that as a judge of the 2012 Literary Awards he met the Petitioner, read her award-
wining article.__ __________ _." and "referred" her to become a member of TFHKW 
in 2013. He asserts that TFHKW is "composed of writers who already demonstrated significant 
contribution to the literary landscape in Hong Kong" and its vetting process is "extremely selective." 
He indicates that for admission to TFHKW "writers must be referred by a minimum of two existing 
members ... must have published regularly and frequently in major publications and must have 
published a literary book." In addition, the vetting committee must unanimously agree "on the 
applicant's prominence in the Hong Kong literary scene, the significance of the contribution they made 
as a writer, and the strength of their writing abilities." He indicates that some past members of the 
association are author! land journalist I I He provides that "[t]he fact that [the 
petitioner] was admitted, at such a young age ... demonstrate[s] that she is a prodigy who has already 
changed the literary landscape of Hong Kong .... " He refers to several of the Petitioner's articles 
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). 
3 
published in the magazines Hong Kong Writers, Mengya, and One between 2015 and 2016, after the 
date when the Petitioner became a member of TFH KW. 3 
The Petitioner also provided an article dated 2019 written by I I from an unidentified Chinese­
language webpage, in whichl I indicates that she participated in seminars and lectures organized 
by members of TFHKW, met the Petitioner, and "found out that in order to be accepted into [TFHKW], 
the applicant not only need[s] to be referred by at least two existing members but also need[s] to have 
tremendous writing talents, personal achievements and contribution to the literary scene to be 
recognized and approved by the Executive Committee." I ~s article, however, does not explain 
how she knows of the membership requirements for the association. 
Upon review, the letters froml ~ndl Ida not establish that to become a member of TFHKW 
"recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields" must judge the Petitioner's 
"outstanding achievements," as required under the plain language of the criterion.4 The letters do not 
provide information as to who evaluated the Petitioner's qualifications before selecting her as a 
member or whether the individual(s) who evaluated her qualifications are "national or international 
experts in their disciplines or fields." The Petitioner must document that she meets each element in 
the plain language of the criterion. The Petitioner must, therefore, provide some documentation from 
the federation relevant to the nature of who is responsible for making the appointments. 
In addition, the Petitioner has not shown that the requirement that prospective members provide 
evidence of having "published regularly and frequently in major publications and must have published 
a literary book" is tantamount to imposing an "outstanding achievement" requirement for membership. 
In addition, while the letters from TFHKW indicate that the association considers in the membership 
process the applicant's "influence and impact on the literary landscape of Hong Kong and China, at 
large" or "prominence in the Hong Kong literary scene, the significance of the contribution they made 
as a writer, and the strength of their writing abilities," these statements are not adequately supported 
by objective evidence of how these factors are considered or weighed. The record does not establish 
the process by which prospective members are evaluated, nor does it demonstrate that TFHKW 
imposes additional qualitative criteria that amount to an "outstanding achievements" requirement, as 
asserted byl I 
Moreover, we note that the letters from I I and D differ as to the selection criteria, and the 
record lacks evidence that corroborates the actual selection requirements for membership in the 
TFHKW. The record does not contain the federation's constitution or bylaws that discuss membership 
requirements and the qualifications of member~lication reviewers. The Petitioner has not 
shown that the selection requirements I landL__J listed in their letters came from any official 
documents, such as the society's constitution or bylaws. 
3 The record indicates that prior to the date when the Petitioner became a member of TFHKW two of her articles, ·c=J I I and I I were published, respectively, in Mengya magazine 
supplement (2012) and Meiwen magazine (2013). In addition, the record reflects that in 2012 her bookl I I I was published, describing her experiences ire=Jduring her junior year abroad while an undergraduate student 
at The Chinese University! I 
4 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 6-7. 
4 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that she satisfies this criterion, and 
we withdraw the Director's decision for 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 
necessary translation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
The Director found that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion without identifying the qualifying material 
and explaining his determination. In order to meet this criterion, the Petitioner must demonstrate 
published material about her in professional or major trade publications or other major media, as well 
as the title, date, and author of the material. 5 Because the record does not reflect that the Petitioner 
established eligibility under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii), we will withdraw the findings 
of the Director for this criterion. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that she is eligible for this criterion based on six online articles 
about her and relating to her work, and evidence relating to www.qq.com, www.ifeng.com, 
www.163.com, and www.sina.com.cn. However, the record does not establish that the media in which 
these articles were published can be considered either professional or major trade publications or 
another type of major media. For example, the Petitioner submitted country ranking and/or website 
traffic regarding www.ifeng.com, www.qq.com, www.163.com, and www.sina.cn, internet portals 
which are popular in China. However, the aforementioned articles were posted on specific webpages 
within those portals, such as js.qq.com, js.news.163.com, news.dichan.sina.com.cn, 
canews.ifeng.com, the Franklin Reading Club webpage (mp.weixin.qq.com), and the Hong Kong 
Writers Magazine blog (blog.sina.com.cn), about which information was not provided. Here, the 
record does not include information regarding the specific media on which these articles were 
published, and they are therefore not qualifying under this criterion. In addition, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate the author of the article published on news.dichan.sina.com.cn. The inclusion of the 
author is not optional but a regulatory requirement. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii). 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that she satisfies this criterion, and 
we withdraw the Director's decision for this criterion. 
111. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not submitted the required initial evidence of a one-time achievement. In addition, 
we find that the Petitioner does not satisfy the criteria relating to memberships in associations requiring 
outstanding achievements and published materials about her and her work in the field. Although she 
submits evidence for two additional criteria on appeal, relating to original contributions of major 
significance at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v) and scholarly articles at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi), we need 
not reach these additional grounds. As the Petitioner cannot fulfill the initial evidentiary requirement 
of three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), we reserve these issues.6 Accordingly, we need not 
provide the type of final merits determination referenced in Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-
5 See USCIS Policy Memorandum PM 602-0005.1, supra, at 7. 
6 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach). 
5 
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 l&N Dec. 953, 954 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994). Here, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the significance of her 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 she 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 experience as a writer and author, the record does not contain sufficient 
evidence establishing that she is among the upper echelon in her field. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her 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. 
6