sustained EB-1A Case: Footwear Design

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 10994398 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : OCT . 6, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a footwear designer , 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner had satisfied at least three of ten initial evidentiary criteria, as required . 
The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act , 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act makes immigrant visas available to aliens 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 was a footwear designer forL~from 2004 to 2007 andDfrom 2007 to 2016, 
and has been a senior footwear designer fore=] since 2016. 1 At the time of filing, the Petitioner 
worked o~ I product line. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that he has 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 Petitioner claims to have met four criteria, summarized below: 
• (iii), Published material about the alien in professional or major media; 
• (v), Original contributions of major significance; 
• (viii), Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments; and 
• (ix), High remuneration for services. 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner met only the evidentiary criteria numbered (viii) and (ix). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he also meets the other two claimed evidentiary criteria. 
After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we conclude that the Petitioner has met all four 
claimed criteria. We agree with the Director's determinations regarding criteria (viii) and (ix), and we 
explain, below, why the Petitioner has also satisfied criteria (iii) and (v). 
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) 
1 Both._l _ ____.I and D use._l __ _.!trade names. 
2 
The Director determined that three of four submitted articles are about the Petitioner, relating to his 
work in the field, but that the Petitioner had not shown that the articles appeared in publications that 
meet the regulatory requirements. 
The strongest evidence under this criterion relates to ~I ---;::::====:!...I ..=a:....Jpc:..:e::.:..;riodical aimed at sneaker 
enthusiasts. The Petitioner's evidence establishes that I I has a very substantial 
international following, to the point that other publications have covered its success. 
Evidence of the alien's original scient#fic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions o_f major significance in the.field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v) 
Letters in the record describe the Petitioner's participation in various projects. The Director gave limited 
weight to the submitted letters, because their authors have all worked with the Petitioner in various 
capacities. Therefore, their familiarity with the Petitioner and his work is not indicative of wider 
recognition in the field. The Petitioner has, however, corroborated key assertions in those letters. 
For example, the senior vice president of Global Design for I I states that the Petitioner developed a 
'I • I which "delivers hugely superior levels of I • I and natural foot 
movement." The official indicates that the Petitioner's work has had "significant and widespread 
influence." Other materials in the record show that other brands have begun introducing shoes with 
I l provoking comparisons to the Petitioner's! ldesign. In this way, the record shows 
both that the Petitioner's work has influenced other shoe designers, and that the Petitioner's design is the 
recognized reference point for the competing imitations. 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the Petitioner submitted the reqms1te initial evidence, we will evaluate whether he has 
demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, his sustained national or international acclaim and 
that he is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and that his achievements 
have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. In a final merits determination, 
we analyze 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 In this matter, we determine that the Petitioner has established his eligibility by a 
preponderance of the evidence. 
The record as a whole supports a finding of eligibility. The Director acknowledged the Petitioner's 
leading or critical role ror orgriz~ establishments with a distinguished reputation, performing 
in key design roles for andL___j both major footwear brands. The Petitioner has worked at 
2 See also USCTS 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 ADI 1-14 4 (Dec.22.2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/legal-resources/policy-memoranda (stating that adjudicators should then evaluate the evidence 
together when considering the petition in its entirety to determine if the petitioner has established, by a preponderance of 
the evidence, the required high level of expertise for the immigrant classification). 
3 
the highest levels of major brand initiatives, some of which maintained steady sales even when the 
industry as a whole endured a significant decline. The Petitioner and his designs have attracted 
significant attention in publications devoted to fashion, or to footwear specifically, and the record 
documents how the Petitioner's work forl lhas influenced competitors' designs to a greater 
degree than the Director acknowledged in the denial notice. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has established that he meets at least three of the evidentiary criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). He has also demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim in his field 
and submitted extensive documentation of his achievements. Lastly, the Petitioner has shown that he 
intends to continue working in the United States in his area of expertise and that his entry will 
substantially benefit prospectively the United States. He therefore qualifies for classification as an 
individual of extraordinary ability. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
4