sustained
EB-1A
sustained EB-1A Case: Systems And Control Engineering
Decision Summary
The appeal was sustained because the AAO determined that the petitioner's evidence met the minimum eligibility requirements. The director had initially denied the petition, but the AAO found that the petitioner successfully established qualification under three regulatory criteria: judging the work of others, original scientific contributions of major significance, and authorship of scholarly articles.
Criteria Discussed
Judging The Work Of Others Original Scientific Contributions Authorship Of Scholarly Articles
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
identifying data deleted to
prevent clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy
PUBLIC COpy
DATE: AUG 24 201Z Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Citi/cnship and Immigration Scrvi(;t:~
Administrative Appeals Office (;\AO)
20 Massachusetts Ave .. N.¥/ .. MS 209{)
Washington. DC 20529-209(}
u. S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
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. § lI53(b)(I)(A)
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the
documents related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please
be advised that any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office.
Thank you,
:,'" \
Perry Rhew
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director,
Texas Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The
appeal will be sustained.
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. § 1153(b)(l)(A), as an
alien of extraordinary ability in the sciences. The director determined that the petitioner had not
established the requisite extraordinary ability through extensive documentation and sustained
national or international acclaim.
Congress set a very high benchmark for aliens of extraordinary ability by requiring through the
statute that the petitioner demonstrate the alien's "sustained national or international acclaim" and
present "extensive documentation" of the alien's achievements. See section 203(b)(I)(A)(i) of the
Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) states that
an alien can establish sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a one-time
achievement, specifically a major, internationally recognized award. Absent the receipt of such an
award, the regulation outlines ten categories of specific objective evidence. 8 C.F .R.
§ 204.5(h)(3)(i) through (x). The petitioner must submit qualifying evidence under at least three of
the ten regulatory categories of evidence to establish the basic eligibility requirements.
On appeal, counsel asserts that the petitioner meets the categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R.
§§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv), (v), and (vi). For the reasons discussed below, the AAO finds that the
petitioner meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for classification as an alien of
extraordinary ability.
I. Law
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that:
(I) 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
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit
prospectively the United States.
Page 3
u.s. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 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 H.R. 723 10 I st Cong., 2d
Sess. 59 (1990); 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-99 (Nov. 29,1991). 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. Id. and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2).
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) requires that an alien demonstrate his or her sustained
acclaim and the recognition of his or her achievements in the field. Such acclaim and achievements
must be established either through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major,
international recognized award) or through meeting at least three of the following ten categories of
evidence:
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally
recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
(ii) Documentation of the alien'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;
(iii) 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
sough!. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and
any necessary translation;
(iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as ajudge
of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which
classification is sought;
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business
related contributions of major significance in the field;
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles III the field, III
professional or major trade publications or other major media;
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or
showcases;
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for
organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high
remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field; or
Page 4
(x) Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office
receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales.
In 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Ninth Circuit) reviewed the denial of a
petition filed under this classification. Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). Although
the court upheld the AAO's decision to deny the petition, the court took issue with the AAO's
evaluation of evidence submitted to meet a given evidentiary criterion.! With respect to the criteria
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and (vi), the court concluded that while USCIS may have raised
legitimate concerns about the significance of the evidence submitted to meet those two criteria,
those concerns should have been raised in a subsequent "final merits determination." !d. at 1121-22.
The court stated that the AAO's evaluation rested on an improper understanding of the regulations.
Instead of parsing the significance of evidence as part of the initial inquiry, the court stated that "the
proper procedure is to count the types of evidence provided (which the AAO did)," and if the
petitioner failed to submit sufficient evidence, "the proper conclusion is that the applicant has failed
to satisfy the regulatory requirement of three types of evidence (as the AAO concluded)." Id. at
1122 (citing to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3». The court also explained the "final merits determination" as
the corollary to this procedure:
If a petitioner has submitted the requisite evidence, USCIS determines whether the
evidence demonstrates both a "level of expertise indicating that the individual is one
of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the [ir] field of endeavor,"
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), and "that the alien has sustained national or international
acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of
expertise." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Only aliens whose achievements have garnered
"sustained national or international acclaim" are eligible for an "extraordinary
ability" visa. 8 U.S.C. § I I 53(b)(l)(A)(i).
Id. at 1119-20.
Thus, Kazarian sets forth a two-part approach where the evidence IS first counted and then
considered in the context of a final merits determination.
II. Analysis
A. Evidentiary Criteria
This petition, filed on June 7, 2011, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary
ability as a systems and control engineering researcher. Upon review of the petitioner's appeal
and the documentation of record, the AAO finds that the petitioner's evidence meets the
categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. §§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv), (v), and (vi). Accordingly, the petitioner
meets at least three of the ten categories of evidence that must be satisfied to establish the
I Specifically, the court stated that the AAO had unilaterally imposed novel substantive or evidentiary requirements
beyond those set forth in the regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv) and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Page 5
minimum eligibility requirements necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability.
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).
B. Final Merits Determination
The AAO will next conduct a final merits determination that considers all of the evidence in the
context of whether or not the petitioner has demonstrated: (I) a "level of expertise indicating that
the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of
endeavor," 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2); and (2) "that the alien has sustained national or international
acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Section
203(b)(l)(A) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). See also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20.
In the present matter, the petitioner has submitted extensive documentation of his achievements
in the field of thermal fluid control and has demonstrated a "career of acclaimed work in the field"
as contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990). The submitted
evidence is sufficient to demonstrate the petitioner's sustained national acclaim and that his
achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise. Moreover, the submitted
documentation shows that the petitioner is among that small percentage who have risen to the
very top of the field of endeavor.
III. Conclusion
In review, while not all of the petitioner's evidence carries the weight imputed to it by counsel,
the petitioner has submitted evidence qualifying under at least three of the ten categories of
evidence and established a "level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small
percentage who have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of endeavor" and "sustained national or
international acclaim." His achievements have been recognized in his field of expertise. The
petitioner has established that he seeks to continue working in the same field in the United
States. The petitioner has established that his entry into the United States will substantially
benefit prospectively the United States. Therefore, the petitioner has established eligibility for
the benefit sought under section 203 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.
ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the petition is
approved. Use this winning precedent in your petition
MeritDraft analyzes sustained AAO decisions like this one to generate petition arguments that mirror what actually gets approved.
Build Your Winning Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.