remanded EB-1A Case: Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 15798898 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 26, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a martial arts athlete, seeks classification as an individual 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 although the Petitioner 
established that she meets the initial evidence requirements for this classification, she did not establish, 
as required, that she has sustained national or international acclaim and is one of that small percentage 
who have risen to the very top of the field. The Director dismissed the Petitioner's subsequent 
combined motion to reopen and reconsider on the same grounds. The matter is now before us on 
appeal. 
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 withdraw the Director's 
decision and remand the matter for entry of a new decision consistent with the following analysis. 
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 
international 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 criteria 
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) 
(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); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a martial arts athlete who competes in the traditional karate discipline and has also 
served as an instructor in karate and Krav Maga. She indicates that she intends to continue her career 
as a competitive athlete and martial arts instructor in the United States. 
As the Petitioner has neither claimed nor established that she has received a major, internationally 
recognized award, she must demonstrate that she meets the initial evidence requirements by satisfying 
at least three of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner provided evidence establishing that she meets three criteria, related to lesser nationally or 
internationally recognized awards, memberships in organizations that require outstanding 
achievements of their members, and judging the work of others in her field. See 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii) and (iv).1 
Because the Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied the initial evidence requirement, he 
proceeded to a final merits determination. In a final merits determination, the Director must analyze 
all of a petitioner's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine if their 
successes are sufficient to demonstrate that they have extraordinary ability in the field of endeavor. 
See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 
1119-20. 2 
1 The Director determined that the Petitioner claimed, but did not establish, that she meets the criteria related to display of 
her work at artistic exhibitions or showcases and performance in a leading or critical role for organizations that have a 
distinguished reputation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vii) and (viii). 
2 See also 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 4 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/po I icymanual/HTM L/Po I icyManual. htm I. 
2 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's decisions, including both the original denial and 
the decision dismissing her motion, reflect that he did not consider all the evidence together in its 
totality in determining whether she is eligible for the benefit sought, and instead narrowly focused on 
her awards and recent competition record. 
We agree with the Petitioner's assertion regarding the insufficiency of the Director's final merits 
analysis, as both decisions contain few references to the submitted evidence. For example, although 
the Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied the membership and judging criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(ii) and (iv), no evidence related to these two criteria is mentioned or weighed in the final 
merits discussion; the Director simply observes that the criteria have been met. In fact, as noted by 
the Petitioner, the Director's analysis in the final merits determination in both decisions rested on two 
factors. First, the Director determined that although the Petitioner satisfied had received nationally or 
internationally recognized prizes or awards in karate competitions, she had not demonstrated that the 
level of competition in these tournaments was "elite." Further, the Director emphasized a lack of 
evidence related to the Petitioner's competition in tournaments between 2014 and the date of filing in 
2017 and concluded that, regardless of the reasons for this absence from competition, she could not 
establish her sustained acclaim in the field.3 
An officer must fully explain the reasons for denying a visa petition in order to allow a petitioner a 
fair opportunity to contest the decision and to allow us an opportunity for meaningful appellate review. 
See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(i); see also Matter of M-P-, 20 l&N Dec. 786 (BIA 1994) (finding that a 
decision must fully explain the reasons for denying a motion to allow the respondent a meaningful 
opportunity to challenge the determination on appeal). Here, the Director did not adequately explain 
the reasons for denial of the petition. Accordingly, the Director's decisions denying the petition and 
dismissing the Petitioner's subsequent motion are withdrawn and the petition will be remanded to the 
Director for further review and entry of a new decision, consistent with the discussion below. 
As noted, the record reflects that the Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied the criteria at 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (ii) and (iv) based on the initial evidence submitted with the petition. The 
record does not support the Director's conclusion with respect to these criteria. As the matter will be 
remanded, the Director should review the Petitioner's evidence and, if appropriate, allow her an 
opportunity to submit additional evidence in support of the following evidentiary criteria. 
Documentation of the individual's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally 
recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(h)(3)(i) 
The Petitioner claims to have received both nationally and internationally recognized prizes or awards 
in the sport of traditional karate. In support of her claim that she received nationally recognized prizes, 
she relied on a letter from~----~· founder and chairman of the I I 
3 The Director disregarded evidence related to other martial arts activities in which the Petitioner engaged during this 
period, such as coaching. However, the record indicates the Petitioner intends to engage in both competitive athletics and 
karate instruction in the United States. In general, if a beneficiary has clearly achieved recent national or international 
acclaim as an athlete and has sustained that acclaim in the field of coaching/managing at a national level, adjudicators can 
consider the totality of the evidence as establishing an overall pattern of sustained acclaim and extraordinary ability such 
that we can conclude that coaching is within the beneficiary's area of expertise. 
3 
L------~----{-~~---,._ ___ __Js letter includes a list of 26 competitions in which 
the Petitioner competed in~--~ between 2003 and 2014 and lists the medals she received in each 
competition (a total of 46 gold, silver, and bronze medals). The list identifies the competitions as 
"National" andl !states that the competitions are "nationally or internationally recognized" 
because they "are regulated by WTKF," the World Traditional Karate Federation. The record did not 
include supporting evidence, such as official competition results, award certificates or medals received 
by the Petitioner in these events, or any informatir regar
1
ing the specific competitions in which she 
competed, which included I I Cup," Cup," I I Cup," I ICup," and 
I I Cup," among others. The evidence was not sufficient to establish her receipt of these 
awards or to established that the awards themselves are nationally recognized. 
With res ect to her recei t of international awards, the Petitioner submitted a letter from WTKF 
who states that she received medals in three different~ 
'i=======.I C_h_a_m_p~i-on_s_h-ip_s_h_e-ld_i_ -._r--"-_-_7__, andO(three silver, three bronze, one gold), three medals 
at a j I Championship" event held inl I and four medals at an "International 
Championship" event held inl 11 I did not provide the year in which the 
tournaments were held or address their significance, nor was there any supporting evidence regarding 
these events. 
The Petitioner submitted images of 14 "international medals" and certificates from certain 
tournaments, but there are inconsistencies in this evidence. For example, the Petitioner submitted a 
certificate from thel I traditional karate federation I, ,I indicating that she participated in 
the 13th l !championship in traditional karate in 2003, but it does not list her results. Her 
medals from 2003 appear to be from the lstl I cup, not from the event identified 
in the certificate. She also submits a total of six medals from a competition she identifies as the 2005 
I I Championship, but the medals indicate on their face that they are from al I I [championship. The information accompanying the images of these medals indicates that 
she received the gold, silver and bronze medals in the individual kumite event and both a silver and a 
bronze medal in the team kata event. We note that it is unlikely that one athlete could have received 
multiple medals in the same event that these results have not been explained. 
The Petitioner also submitted images of two medals which she claims are from the 20111 I 
Championship held irl 11 I referenced this event and indicated that she was awarded 
bronze in the Kumite category and silver in the Kata category. Although she identifies the medals as 
I !Championship awards, the medals indicate on their face that they are from the "IV 
I I Karate Tradicional" or 4th I I Traditional Karate 
I !Tournament. Further, the medals indicate on their reverse that they were awarded for third 
and fourth place finishes. 
Based on the foregoing discussion, we disagree with the Director's determination that the Petitioner's 
initial evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that she meets this criterion. I Is letter was 
lacking pertinent information, such as the dates of the competitions in which she competed and 
information regarding the significance of such competitions. Further, as noted, the supporting 
evidence she provided was internally inconsistent and does not appear to correspond td l's 
statement. The Petitioner must resolve the inconsistencies in the record with independent, objective 
evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 l&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
4 
On remand, the Director should review the evidence submitted in support of this criterion and may 
request additional objective evidence to verify the awards the Petitioner received and the national and 
international recognition associated with those awards. It is not sufficient for the Petitioner to identify 
the events at which she competed as "national" or "international" as it is not presumed that every 
karate competition that draws from a national or international field of competitors awards nationally 
or internationally recognized prizes or awards. 
Documentation of the individual'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. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii) 
The Petitioner claimed eligibility under this criterion based on her membership inl J WTKF 
and the World Shotokan Karate Federation (WSKF) and stated that "these associations only grant 
membership to the top Martial Artists in their respective countries or disciplines." As noted, the 
Director determined that she met this criterion based on the initial evidence, which included the above-
referenced letters from I and I I, as wel I as a letter from .__ _____ ____. 
who states that he currently works as an instructor at a WSKF Academy in Ireland, but was formerly 
a board member of WSKFI I Upon review of these letters, we conclude that they do not 
establish the Petitioner's eligibility under this criterion. 
,___ ___ __.I states that the Petitioner "has been a martial artist at I I for several years" but 
does not indicate when she became a member. He indicates that "she was granted membership into 
our professional team through a highly rigorous process" and lists various requirements but it is 
unclear whether those requirements apply to,___ __ __.membership, team membership or both.0 
I I mentions that applicants must be practicing martial artists with a black belt or higher, must 
be "nationally or internationally recognized," must have attained gold or silver awards in at least 10 
national or international competitions, and must demonstrate their "outstanding ability" to the 
"members of the Board of Directors." He does not indicate where the organization's official 
membership requirements and review processes can be found, identify the members of the Board of 
Directors, or indicate whether those members are recognized national or international experts in the 
field. Further, since the Petitioner did not provide evidence of when she became a member of 
I lwe have no basis to evaluate whether she met the membership requirements as stated by 
I I 
In his letter, Mr. Carrion asserts that the Petitioner has been a member of WTKF since 2004. He states 
that membership in WTKF requires "that the potential member present herself to a committee of 
judges who evaluate the martial artist's career and then run a series of exams on the martial artist" 
which covers "both theoretical and practical subjects." He identified five "esteemed martial artists" 
(WTKF Board Members from several countries) and states that they served on the Petitioner's 
evaluation committee. His statement does not demonstrate that membership requires "outstanding 
achievements" as he does not identify the basis on which the committee evaluates a martial artist's 
career. Nor can we determine based on the information provided that passing the practical and 
theoretical exam is an "outstanding achievement" in and of itself. Further, the Petitioner did not submit 
5 
supporting evidence, such as the WTKF's by-laws or other documentation of its membership 
requirements for individual athletes.4 
Finally, the Petitioner submitted the referenced letter from I I who states that he was 
previously a board member of WSKFI lprior to emigrating to Ireland. He asserts that the 
Petitioner was granted membership in WSKF in 2015 and that he served on the evaluation committee 
alongside other senior WSKF officials from I I and elsewhere. I I indicates that 
"WSKF approved the incorporation of [the Petitioner] due to her National and International 
achievement along her career." His letter does not sufficiently detail the WSKF membership 
requirements and review procedures for individual members, and, as with the evidence related to the 
WTKF, there is no supporting documentation that describes these requirements. 
Without additional documentation showing thatl I WTKF, and WSKF require outstanding 
achievements of their members as judged by internationally or nationally recognized experts as a 
condition for membership, the Petitioner has not shown that she meets this criterion. On remand, the 
Director should review the evidence submitted in support of this criterion and may request additional 
independent evidence related to the Petitioner's memberships and the organizations' membership 
requirements. 
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. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) 
As noted, the Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion based solely on the initial 
evidence submitted with the petition. That evidence was limited to the aforementioned letter fromD 
I I of I I In his letter.I I stated that the Petitioner "ferformed af a judge 
for our competitions" and that "[h]er responsibilities as a judge on behalf of,___ __ ___, are at a 
national level." He lists 23 events held inl I between 2000 and 2014, identifies them as 
"national events," and indicates that the Petitioner served as a judge at the junior, elite and elite/black 
belt level. I I states that in order to be a judge for competitions at the national level, an 
athlete must possess a brown belt or higher and pass a written test. The Petitioner did not submit 
documentation of herl I judging qualification or her judging credentials from any of the 
events referenced by! I many of which are also listed as events in which she competed as 
an athlete. He also indicates that the Petitioner "was selected as a judge for our national competitions 
... because of her internationally recognized track record as a martial artist and the fact that she is a 
respected figure in karate." However, the Petitioner was only 14 years old in 2000, the year in which 
I I asserts that she began officiating national level junior competitions. By contrast, he 
indicates that her earliest award in competition was earned in 2003. 
For these reasons, we disagree with the Director's determination that the initial evidence was sufficient 
to establish that the Petitioner meets this criterion. As the matter will be remanded, the Director should 
4 We reviewed the official website of the WTKF (www.wtkfederation.org) and note there is no indication that athletes may 
apply for individual membership to WTKF. The member application procedures provided refer only to national federations 
wishing to seek membership in WTKF. 
6 
review all evidence submitted in support of this criterion5 and, if appropriate, allow the Petitioner the 
opportunity to submit additional evidence. 
As discussed above, we agree with the Petitioner's argument that the Director's initial decision and 
decision on motion did not provide the Petitioner with sufficient explanation of the reasons for denial. 
However, upon de nova review, we disagree with the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner's initial 
evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that she met three of the initial evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). As the Petitioner was not put on notice of the deficiencies in that evidence, and the 
Director's ultimate decision was otherwise deficient, will remand the matter in its entirety to the 
Director for further review and entry of a new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
If the Director determines that the Petitioner satisfies at least three of the initial evidentiary criteria, 
the new decision should include an analysis of the totality of the record evaluating whether the 
Petitioner has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, her sustained national or 
international acclaim and whether the record demonstrates that she is one of the small percentage at 
the very top of the field of endeavor, and that her achievements have been recognized in the field 
through extensive documentation. See section 203(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); 
see also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 
111. CONCLUSION 
The matter will be remanded to the Director for further action in accordance with this decision. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
5 We note that, on appeal, the Petitioner claims for the first time that she is an accredited judge, inr11ctar and examiner of 
WSKR land judged national and international WSKF-sponsored competitions held in I in 2015 and 
2016. 
7