remanded EB-1A Case: Athletics

• 
DATE: DEC 1 1 2012 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Admini<;[ralivc Appeal<- Olliee (J\J\()) 
20 Massachuselh Ave., N.W .. MS 209() 
WashinS,!.on, DC 2052l)-2090 
U.S. citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Wllfker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ahility Pursuant to Section 
203(h )(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, H U .S.c. § 11 53(h)(I )(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. Please note that all documents have 
heen returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please also note that any further inquiry must be 
made to that office. 
Thank you, 
~?f-
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
• 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
withdraw the director" s decision; however, because the petition is not approvable, it is remanded for 
further action and consideration. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in athletics, pursuant to section 
203(b)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § l1S3(b)(l)(A). The director 
determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim of the 
beneficiary necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. The director's 
decision also stated that the petitioner failed to respond to the director's notice of intent to deny. 
On appeal, counsel asserts that a response was timely filed. The record contains evidence that the 
petitioner did respond to the director's notice, specifically a copy of the response and a certified mail 
postal receipt showing that the director received the response on November 17, 2011. As the director 
failed to consider the submitted evidence, this matter will be remanded for a full adjudication of the 
petition on the merits. 
The director must issue a new denial notice, contaInIng specific findings that will afford the 
petitioner the opportunity to present a meaningful appeal. A'i always in these proceedings, the 
burden of proof reSlS solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1361. 
ORDER: The director's decision is withdrawn; however, the petition is currently unapprovable, 
and therefore the AAO may not approve the petition at this time. Because the petition is 
not approvable, the petition is remanded to the director for issuance of a new, detailed 
decision which, if adverse to the petitioner, is to be certified to the Administrative 
Appeals Office for review.