sustained EB-1A Case: Business

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF J-Z-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: NOV. 14,2016 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a college lecturer in accounting and business management with a significant 
publication history, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in business. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) ~ection 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had 
not satisfied at least three of the regulatory criteria as required. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In his appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
maintains that the Director erred by misapplying factors for one criterion to a different criterion. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b) of the Act states in pertinent part: 
(1) Priority workers. -- Visas shall first be made available ... to qualified immigrants 
who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. --An alien is described in this subparagraph 
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 
/ 
(b)(6)
Matter of J-Z-
(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 the 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). ' 
Satisfaction of at least three criteria, however , does not, in and 6f itself, establish eligibility for this 
classification. Se_e Kazarian v. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th· Cir. 201 0) (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.p.C. 2013);Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011) aff'd, 683 
F.3d. 1030 (9th Cir. 2012); Matter ofChawath e, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010) (holding that 
the "truth is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence'alone but by its quality" and that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) examines "each piece of evidence for relevance , 
probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of the 
evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true"). Accordingly, where a 
petitioner submits qu'alifying evidence under at least three criteria, we will determine whether the 
totality of 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. 
II. ANALYSIS . 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner was a lecturer in the accounting department of 
having completed his postdoctoral research at m 
He received his Ph.D. in accounting from The record includes 
reference letters, evidence of participation as a peer-reviewer of manuscripts and grant applications , 
several published articles, citation records , and confirmation of his duties for the 
The Director accepted that the Petitioner met two criteria as a judge of the work of others and author 
of published material. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), (vi). The Director denied the petition after 
concluding that the Petitioner did not satisfy a third criterion. 
Specifically, the Director found that 
the Petitioner had not demonstrated that his roles for were leading or critical. 8 C.F .R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(viii). Within that discussion, the Director referenced factors for the contributions 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v) . On appeal, the Petitioner notes that he never addressed the 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter of J-Z-
contributions criterion and maintains that the Director erred by using the factors from that criterion 
to evaluate the nature ofthe Petitioner's role for 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
As the Petitioner has served as a peer-reviewer for manuscripts and grants and has authored several 
scholarly articles, the record supports the Director's conclu~ion that the Petitioner meets the criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and (vi). At issue, then, is whether he has satisfied a third criterion .. 
The Petitioner maintains on appeal that he also meets the leading or critical role criterion at 8 
C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(viii), and the record supports that conclusion. 
The Petitioner served as a member of and one of the 
institute's research foundation directors. The record contains letters from another research 
and from president and chief foundation director, 
executive officer of discussing the Petition er's role with the institute .
1 
In his letter, explains that the "carries [out] the most 
important mission of i.e., supporting timely research in accounting and financial management 
subjects." official materials, in the section, list research first on its list of how 
it supports the accounting profession. According to this item, was the first organization 
established to conduct research for the management accounting profession and has funded more than 
5QO researchers who have produced more than 250 studies. As a director , the Petitioner reviewed 
research proposals for funding approval. Given this information, it is apparent that research is a 
major part of mission, and the Petitioner has played a critical role towards that pursuit. In 
addition, confirms that the Petitioner contributed to the development of a plan for the 
promotion of its initiatives at various forums, and the translation of its products into Chinese. 
With respect to the elaborates that while a 
member, the Petitioner helped to create new college and university relationships and reinforced 
existing ones. The goal of these relationships is to promote and enhance and its 
credential. affirms that as a committee member, 
the Petitioner reviewed "university management accounting programs that sought certification by 
Overall, characterizes 
the Petitioner's contributions to as "invaluable." 2 
founded in is a worldwide association with more than 75,000 members and more than 
300 professional arid student chapters. It has certified more than 20,000 who are currently 
active. According to materials, their certification is the leading management accounting 
1 While the Director questioned the sufficiency of letters under this criterion, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)( I) 
indicates that letters from employers are appropriate evidence of experience. 
2 issued the Petitioner a certificate in Recognition of Outstanding Service as a committee member, but did not 
document the selection criteria or significance of this recognition . Nevertheless , the fact that recognized the 
Petitioner in some capacity is consistent with statement that they value his service to them. 
3 
(b)(6)
Matter of J-Z-
credential in the world and the only one prominent in both of the world's two largest economies, the 
United States and China. Other documentation in the record reflects that the is earned after 
the candidate completes a four-part exam and two years of continuous experience, and that a 
designation enhances earning power. The record in the aggregate establishes by a preponderance of 
the evidence that the Petitioner has served a critical role for which enjoys a distinguished 
reputation. Accordingly, the Petitioner has met a third criterion. 
B. Final M~rits Determination 
In the final merits determination, we consider the totality of the record to determine if a petitioner 
has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he has sustained national or international 
acclaim, and that his achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive 
documentation,3 making him one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. If so, a petitioner has met the requisite burden of proof and established eligibility for visa 
classification as an individual of "extraordinary ability." 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. 
The Petitioner has reviewed manuscripts for multiple journals and 
annual meetings, and was invited 
to serve as a discussant of another researcher's presented paper at a conference. He also reviewed 
grant proposals for as one of a limited number of research foundation directors that the 
credits in their promotional materials. These duties in the aggregate are consistent with a finding 
that the field recognizes his achievements. 
As stated above, the Petitioner has authored scholarly articles. Pursuant to the reasoning in 
Kazarian , 596 F.3d at 1122, however, we will consider the field's response to these articles in our 
final merits determination.4 In assessing the level of the Petitioner's contributions in the field,5 the 
Director noted that citations can serve as an objective gauge in determining an author's influence. 
The Director did not acknowledge, however, that the record contains evidence that the Petitioner has 
been widely cited in China. Specifically, the Petitioner presented a certified translation of results 
from a search on the journal database. These results 
show two of the Petitioner's articles have been cited 50 or more times. The Petitioner also provided . 
examples of citations in English-language journals. These citations go beyond merely footnoting the 
3 While the statute requires extensive documentation , eligibility is to be determined not by the quantity of the filings 
alone but by their quality. Chawathe , 25 I&N Dec . at 376 (citing Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 80 (Comm 'r 1989)). 
We "examine each piece of evidence for relevance , probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the 
context of the totality of the evidence." !d. 
4 In a request for evidence, the Director stated that authorship of scholarly articles alone is insufficient to meet the 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi); the Petitioner must also demonstrate the impact of those articles. USCIS, 
however, may not unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204 .5. Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1221, citing Love Korean Church v. Chertoff, 549 F.3d 749, 758 (9th Cir.2008) . As the 
plain language of the criterion at 8 C.F.R . § 204 .5(h)(3)(vi) does not include the impact ofthe Petitioner's articles as a 
factor , it is relevant only in the final merits determination . 
5 The Director did not explain why contributions of major significance are relevant to the leading or critical role criterion 
f 
under which he included this analysis . 
4 
(b)(6)
Matter of J-Z-
Petitioner's work; they credit one of the Petitioner's articles as the sole authority for' the proposition 
that an system reduces information asymmetry. 
chair of the accounting department at the explains that the 
Petitioner's published work has "been widely referenced by many scholars in the field of corporate 
governance and by numerous company administrators in China." continues that these 
articles have inspired many Chinese companies to implement systems. The number of Chinese 
citations supports this letter. Accordingly, for all of the above reasons in the aggregate, his 
publication record is harmonious with recognition in the field. 
Finally, is a worldwide association with chapters and offices in multiple countries. The 
members of the Committee on Academic .Relations and the research foundation directors are from 
around the world. names the Petitioner as one of its limited number of members and directors, 
affording him name recognition. These factors are indicative of sustained national or international 
acclaim. For all of the above reasons, the evidence in the aggregate demonstrates that the Petitioner 
is an individual of extraordinary ability. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner submitted the requisite initial evidence and established his extraordinary ability when 
considered in a final merits decision. Section 203(b )(1 )(A)(i) of the Act. By demonstrating that he 
seeks to continue to work in his area of extraordinary ability, and there being no indication 
otherwise, we are satisfied that the Petitioner's entry will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. Section 203(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the Act. Therefore, the Petitioner has met his burden of 
proof. Sections 203(b)(l)(A), 291 ofthe Act. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter of J-Z-, ID# 80634 (AAO Nov. 14, 2016) 
5