sustained EB-1A Case: Law

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rni. 3000 
PUBLIC COPY 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: LIN 06 026 5 1569 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: OCT 1 0 2001 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
-?+ 
hobert P. Wiernann, Chief 
/ Administrative Appeals Office 
LIN0602651569 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be sustained and the 
petition will be approved. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or intemational acclaim necessary to 
qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
9 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Pnority 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 ths 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 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have 
consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals seeking immigrant 
visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). As used in this 
section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that 
small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). The specific 
requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has sustained national or international 
acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise are set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show 
that he has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on November 2,2005, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability 
as an attorney, scholar, and lecturer. The petitioner is presently the Senior Partner for CJ International Law 
Offices in Seoul, Korea, a firm he founded in1986. 
LIN 06 026 5 1569 
Page 3 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. @ 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized 
award). Barring the alien's receipt of a major internationally recognized award, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
@ 204.5(h)(3) outlines ten criteria, at least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the 
sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. We find that the petitioner's 
evidence meets at least three of the regulatory criteria. 
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 alliedJeZd of speciJication for which classiJication is sought, 
The petitioner submitted a June 7,2006 letter fio~~rofessor, Chung-Ang University College 
of Law, stating that the petitioner served as Editor-in-Chief of the Korean Journal of Comparative ~aw.' 
further states that "[v]irtually every major U.S. law school library subscribes to our Journal. It 
. . . is considered the preeminent legal journal for international lawyers." The petitioner also submitted a May 
30, 2006 letter from ~ssistant Librarian for East Asian Law, Gallagher Law Library, 
University of Washington, stating: 
To my knowledge, [the Korean Journal of Comparative Law] was the first English language journal 
ever published on the topic of Korean law, and it is well-known internationally as an important 
scholarly journal. The Gallagher Law Library has subscribed to this journal since its first issue in 
1973. Since its inception, this has been the preeminent English-language journal on Korean law, and 
it is still one of only a very few such publications. 
As Editor-in-Chief for . . . 17 years of the journal's history, [the petitioner] had overall responsibility 
for its success, including the selection of subjects, authors and ultimately, the editorial content. . . . In 
this role, to a large extent, [the petitioner] served as the judge of others in the same field, as it was 
ultimately he who determined whose work would be published. 
The director acknowledged the petitioner's submission of the preceding letters, but concluded that they were 
not sufficient to meet this criterion, stating: "The record lacks any supporting documentary evidence of this 
role. Journals generally list any editors on the title pages, but the copies provided did not include any such 
information." 
On appeal, the petitioner submits evidence of pages from several volumes of the Korean Journal of 
Comparative Law identifying him as its Editor-in-Chief. Based on the evidence submitted below and on 
appeal, we find that the petitioner meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien S original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signzj?cance in the$eld. 
1 
 The record reflects that also served as Editor-in-Chief of this journal after the petitioner's 
tenure. 
LIN 06 026 5 1569 
Page 4 
The ~etitioner submitted evidence showing that he served in the Korean National Assemblv from 1997 to 
LI 
2006 The petitioner also submitted an August 16, 2005 letter from current President of the 
University of Utah, who previously served as an Ambassador for Trade and Environmental Affairs, Deputy 
Undersecretary of State for Economic and Agricultural Affairs, and Deputy Legal Advisor to the U.S. 
Department of tate. In discussing the petitioner's contributions as a member of the Korean National 
Assembly - states that the petitioner played "a pivotal role in drafting Korea's Product 
Liability Act and the Foreign Investment Promotion Act." An October 26, 2005 letter of support from 
and Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law, states: 
"Between 1997 and 2000, [the petitioner] served as a legislator and was responsible for major overhauls of 
Korean business and economic law." An August 18, 2005 letter of support from, Senior 
Partner in the international law firm of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Tokyo, states: "In the Korean Assembly, 
[the petitioner] was largely responsible for drafting Korea's Product Liability Act, promulgated in 2000. He 
was also the driving force behind the 1998 Foreign Investment Promotion Act." 
The May 30, 2006 letter from 
 states: 
 "One of [the petitioner's] most important 
contributions has been his founding of the Korean Journal of Comparative Law (now the Korean Journal of 
International and Comparative Law) in 1973." The June 7, 2006 letter from states that the 
petitioner "conceived the idea of and started the publication" of the journal. A September 6, 2005 letter of 
support from ~irector of the - Institute for Global Legal Studies and 
Professor of Law at Washington University in St. Louis, also credits the petitioner with establishing the 
- 
Korean Journal of ~om~arative Law, which 
 describes as "the premier English language 
journal on Korean law." 
In this case, prominent legal scholars and experts from around the world have acknowledged the value of the 
petitioner's work and its major significance to the field. Therefore, we find that the petitioner meets this 
criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of his authorship of scholarly articles appearing in professional 
publications such as PaciJic Rim Law and Policy Journal and Korean Journal of International and 
Comparative Law from the 1970s through December 2003. 
The September 6,2005 letter of support from Professor Haley states: 
Although [the petitioner] did not choose an academic career, he has made major contributions to 
scholarship on Korean law . . . . [The petitioner] has lectured in many venues and has written 
numerous articles. Few practicing lawyers in any country have made as significant a contribution to 
the scholarship on the law of their country. 
We find it noteworthy that the petitioner has authored scholarly articles while in government service and in 
private practice as opposed to working primarily in an academic setting. While publication of scholarly 
articles may be inherent to a law career in an pcademic setting, we find that the petitioner's publication record 
' 
LIN 06 026 5 1569 
Page 5 
significantly distinguishes him from other attorneys in public service and private practice as publication in 
these areas is generally not considered a job-related expectation. Further, the petitioner's multiple invitations 
to lecture and teach at prominent academic institutions in the United States demonstrates that his authorship 
has attracted the attention of others in his field. For example, the record includes evidence that the petitioner 
has lectured or taught at the Seoul National University Law School and other prominent academic institutions 
in Korea as well as at leading universities in the United States such as the University of Washington School of 
Law, the Center for Far Eastern Legal Studies at Harvard Law School, and Columbia University Law School. 
states that "invitations like ours are not extended lightly - as the leading programs in Asian Law 
in the United States, these schools exercise great care in deciding whom to invite to participate in the 
respective academic programs." 
In light of the above, the petitioner has established that he meets this criterion. 
In conclusion, the petitioner has satisfied three of the regulatory criteria required for classification as an alien 
of extraordinary ability. Moreover, the evidence, considered in the aggregate, contains sufficient 
documentation of the petitioner's sustained national and international acclaim. Pursuant to the statute and 
regulations, the petitioner qualifies for the classification sought. 
In this case, the totality of the evidence establishes an overall pattern of sustained national and international 
acclaim and extraordinary ability. The petitioner has also established that he seeks to continue working in the 
same field in the United States and that his entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. Therefore, the petitioner has overcome the stated grounds for denial and thereby 
established eligibility for immigrant classification under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has sustained that burden. Accordingly, the decision of the director denying 
the petition will be withdrawn and the petition will be approved. 
ORDER. 
 The appeal is sustained and the petition is approved.