dismissed O-1A Case: Horse Training

idtdfjdng data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave. N.W., Rrn. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: EAC 05 167 53726 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER me: HAR 2 4 2006 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker under Section 10 1 (a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1 10 1 (a)(15)(0)(i) 
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. 
EAC 05 167 53726 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonirnmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service Center, and is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is a horse breeding farm. It seeks 0-1 classification of the beneficiary as an alien with 
extraordinary ability as a horse trainer under section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act), 8 U.S.C. 4 1 10 1 (a)( 1 5)(0)(i), in order to employ him in the United States as a horse trainer for a period of 
three years at a weekly salary of $525 plus housing, insurance and transportation. 
The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary has received 
sustained national or international acclaim and is one of a small percentage who have risen to the very top of his 
field of endeavor. 
On appeal, counsel for the petitioner submits a brief and additional documentation. 
Section 10 1 (a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act provides classification to a qualified alien who has extraordinary ability in the 
sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim, whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation, and who seeks 
to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 2 14.2(0)(3)(ii) defines, in pertinent part: 
Extraordinaly ability in the field of science, education, business, or athletics means a level of 
expertise indicating that the person is one of the small percentage who have arisen to the very top 
of the field of endeavor. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
 214.2(0)(3)(iii) states, in pertinent part, that: 
Evidentialy criteria for an 0-1 alien of extraordinay ability in theJields of science, education, 
business, or athletics. An alien of extraordinary ability in the fields of science, education, 
business, or athletics must demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and 
recognition for achievements in the field of expertise by providing evidence of: 
(A) Receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, such as the Nobel Pnze; or 
(B) At least three of the following forms of documentation: 
(I) Documentation of the alien's receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes 
or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor; 
(2) 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; 
EAC 05 167 53726 
Page 3 
(3) Published material in professional or major trade publications or major media about 
the alien, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is sought, which 
shall include the title, date, and author of such published material, and any necessary 
translation; 
(4) Evidence of the alien's participation on a panel, or individually, as a judge of the work 
of others in the same or in an allied field of specialization to that for which classification 
is sought; 
(5) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions 
of major significance in the field; 
(6) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional 
journals, or other major media; 
(7) Evidence that the alien has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for 
organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation; 
(8) Evidence that the alien has either commanded a high salary or will command a high 
salary or other remuneration for services, evidenced by contracts or other reliable 
evidence. 
(C) If the criteria in paragraph (0)(3)(iii) of this section do not readily apply to the beneficiary's 
occupation, the petitioner may submit comparable evidence in order to establish the beneficiary's 
eligibility. 
The beneficiary in this matter is a 35-year old native and citizen of Mexico. According to the Form 1-129, the 
beneficiary last entered the United States on January 17,2005 pursuant to H-2B classification and worked for the 
petitioner as an assistant horse trainer. 
After a careful review of the record, it must be concluded that the petitioner has failed to overcome the 
grounds for denial of the petition. The record is insufficient to establish that the beneficiary is an alien with 
extraordinary ability as a horse trainer. 
The petitioner stated that none of the regulatory criteria are applicable to the beneficiary and the proffered 
position. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to establish the beneficiary's eligibility as an alien of extraordinary ability 
as a horse trainer pursuant to subsection (C) of 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(0)(3)(iii). We note, however, that the petitioner 
does address criterion number seven in its submissions: 
Evidence that the alien has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for organizations and establishments 
that have a distinguished reputation. 
EAC 05 167 53726 
Page 4 
The petitioner describes itself as a small horse breeding farm in the specialty niche of the sport of "3-day 
eventing." The petitioner stated in its response to the director's request for evidence (RFE) dated May 31, 2005, 
that it has a distinguished reputation and that the beneficiary is employed in a critical capacity for the 
organization. 
The petitioner submitted letters from several individuals, including riders, veterinarians, and fellow breeders 
indicating that the petitioner has an "excellent reputation" and is "one of the best sport horse breeding farms in 
America." The eight regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(0)(3)(iii) reflect the statutory demand for 
"extensive documentation" in section lOl(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act. Opinions from witnesses whom the 
petitioner has selected do not represent extensive documentation. Independent evidence that already existed 
prior to the preparation of the visa petition package carries greater weight than new materials prepared 
especially for submission with the petition. The record contains little objective evidence demonstrating that 
the petitioner has a distinguished reputation. 
The petitioner's evidence does not establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
The comparable evidence submitted by the petitioner consists of statements by various players in horse breeding 
and the three-day eventing sport, as discussed above. Each of the authors attests to the beneficiary's slulls as a 
horse trainer and several state that the he is one of the best trainers that they have seen. The opinions of experts 
in the field, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a successful claim of sustained national 
or international acclaim, however. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) may, in its discretion, use as 
advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 
791, 795 (Comm. 1988). However, CIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination 
regarding an alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting 
the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; CIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to 
whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795-796. CIS may even give less weight to an opinion 
that is not corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way questionable. Id. at 795; See also 
Matter of Soflcci, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 
I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
The petitioner submitted sufficient evidence that the enumerated criteria are not applicable for this petition. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 2 14.2(0)(3)(iii)(C) permits consideration of comparable evidence if the listed criteria 
are not applicable. 
As comparable evidence to criterion one, the director considered the success of horses allegedly trained by the 
beneficiary. The director noted that, of the ten horses that the petitioner stated that the beneficiary trained, only 
two received "awards" and that the evidence indicated that this recognition was not at the national or international 
level. On appeal, counsel states that the director ignored the achievements of other horses trained by the 
beneficiary. Counsel further states, "It is important to understand that most of the horses trained by the 
Beneficiary are still relatively young. An event horse does not come into its prime until the age 7-14. Horses 
trained by the Beneficiary are begnning to compete at the upper levels of the sport and show tremendous 
promise." The petitioner submits, on appeal, a list of the horses that it stated were trained by the beneficiary with 
the results of their competitions. The document indicates that won a first place event at a horse 
EAC 05 167 53726 
Page 5 
show in 2004, that '' had "[elver twenty-one impressive wins,'' and that " "over 
forty impressive wins;" however, although the record contains some documentarv evidence a corro orates the 
-. 
failed to submit documentary evidence of the 
21 wins by 
 " Further, the petitioner submitted no documentary 
evidence to establish that any of these results are recognized as national or international significance in the field 
of "3-day eventing" or horse breeding, or that the beneficiary was primarily responsible for the training that 
resulted in the horses' successes. 
The extraordinary ability provisions of this visa classification are intended to be highly restrictive. See 137 Cong. 
Rec. S18247 (daily ed., Nov. 16, 1991). In order to establish eligibility for extraordinary ability, the statute 
requires evidence of "sustained national or international acclaim" and evidence that the alien's achievements have 
been recognized in the field of endeavor through "extensive documentation." The petitioner has not established 
that the beneficiary's abilities have been so recognized. 
In order to establish eligibility for 0-1 classification, the petitioner must establish that the beneficiary is "at the 
very top" of his field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(0)(3)(ii). The petitioner has not established that the 
beneficiary's achievements have risen to this level. 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit 
sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1361. Here, that burden has 
not been met. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.