sustained O-1A Case: Taekwondo

U.S. Department of tlorneland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
identifykng data 6tieted to 
prevent dearly unwarranted 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
;nv&on of oersonal vrhqw 
puBLIC COPY 
FILE: LIN 05 193 53002 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 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 
ided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
1' 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
I' 
Administrative Appeals Office 
u 
LIN 05 193 53002 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition in a decision dated 
March 29, 2006. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will 
be sustained and the petition will be approved. 
extraordinary ability in athletics under section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 
U.S.C. 
 1 lOl(a)(l5)(0)(i), in order to employ her in the United States as a taekwando coach. 
The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary has received 
sustained national or international acclaim as a coach and is that she is one of a small percentage who have risen to 
the very top of his field of endeavor. 
The petitioner submits a timely appeal, dated April 24,2006, with additional evidence. 
Section 101(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. 5 214.2(0)(3)(ii) defines, in pertinent part: 
Extraordinary 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: 
Evidentiary criteria for an 0-1 alien of extraordinary ability in the$elh 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; 
LIN 05 193 53002 
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 orignal 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 
eligbility. 
The beneficiary in this matter is a native and citizen of Nepal. The evidence on the record indicates that the 
beneficiary last entered the United States as a B-2 nonimmigrant visitor on June 13, 2005. The petitioner filed 
the instant petition in the beneficiary's behalf on June 10, 2005. The petition was denied by the director on 
March 29, 2006. In denying the petition, the director first determined that the petitioner failed to establish that 
the proffered petition requires a person of extraordinary ability. We can find no support in the statute or 
regulations for the director's proposition that the petitioner must establish that the proffered position requires 
someone of 0-1 caliber. We, therefore, withdraw this particular finding of the director. 
In addition to the error discussed above, the director's decision also fails to adequately discuss the petitioner's 
arguments and evidence and the relevant criteria. After careful review of the record, contrary to the director's 
determination, we find the record sufficient to establish that the beneficiary is an alien with extraordinary ability in 
athletics. 
Documentation of the alien 's receipt of nationally or internationally recognizedprizes or awards for excellence in 
thefield of endeavor. 
The director found that the petitioner established the beneficiary meets this criterion. We concur with this finding. 
LIN 05 193 53002 
Page 4 
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. 
In his decision, the director indicated that the petitioner had submitted evidence that the beneficiary was "a bona 
fide member" of the Nepal Taekwando Association. The director denied the petition, in part, because he 
determined that the petitioner failed to establish that ths association requires outstanding achievements of its 
members, as judged by recognized national or international experts. 
On appeal, although the petitioner acknowledges the director's finding regarding the petitioner's membership in 
ths organization, petitioner does not submit any documentation from the Nepal Taekwando Association or other 
pertinent evidence to establish that the association requires outstanding achievements of its members. Instead, the 
epal and a letter from 
letters provides any 
information regarding the Nepal Taekwando Association or its membership requirements. 
The petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
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 classzjlcation is sought, which shall include the title, date, and author of such 
published material, and any necessary translation. 
Despite counsel's specific reference to and citation of exhibits related to this criterion and the submission of 
several published articles which document the beneficiary's receipt of medals, prizes and money, and the fact that 
she was presented the Subikhayat Trishaktipatta (third) decoration by the King of Nepal, the director failed to 
discuss this evidence or to make any finding regarding ths criterion in his decision.' Upon review of the evidence, 
we find the petitioner has established that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
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 alliedjeld of specialization to that for which classifcation is sought. 
As evidence to establish this criterion, the petitioner submitted certificates and other documentation to show that 
the beneficiary has participated in a "Taekwando Referee Seminar" and that she has served as a referee at 
Taekwando matches. The director found this evidence sufficient to establish that the beneficiary meets ths 
criterion. We do not agree. 
' Although the director's request for evidence made reference to the submission of "several news articles about the 
beneficiary, relating to her accomplishments as a Taekwando competitor," the director indicated that the articles did not 
contain the name of the publication, the title, date or author, and did not relate to the beneficiary's accomplishments as a 
coach. As indicated, we find the evidence contains sufficient detail to establish that the beneficiary has been the subject 
of published material. 
LIN 05 193 53002 
Page 5 
First, the record contains no evidence which demonstrates that the beneficiary actually participated as a referee in 
any event. The fact that she completed a seminar does not establish her actual participation. The letter from 
President of the Nepal Olympic Committee, which indicates that the beneficiary is a 
"national player and coach, as well as a National Taekwondo Referee" is not sufficient to establish that she has 
been a referee at any event. 
More significantly, even if the petitioner had established that the beneficiary did referee at a taekwondo event, we 
do not find that in her participation as a referee, she judged the work of others. The duties of a referee are not to 
assess the work or expertise of the individuals involved in the competition. Rather, the responsibility of the referee 
is to ensure that rules and procedures are being followed and that the match is safe and fair. The referee does not 
evaluate or judge the skills or qualifications of the participants. 
Accordingly, we withdraw the determination of the director and find that the beneficiary does not meet thls 
criterion. 
Evidence of the alien 's original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions of major signzjicance in the 
field. 
For criterion number five, the petitioner submits numerous letters which praise the beneficiary's skills as a 
competitor and coach. However, while we do not dispute the writers' high opinion of the beneficiary, the record 
does not contain any evidence which demonstrates that beneficiary made an original contribution, such as the 
introduction of new slulls, training techniques or coaching methods, that are of major signzjicance, in her field of 
endeavor. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has failed to establish that the beneficiary meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in thefield, in professional journals, or other major media. 
No evidence was submitted in relation to criterion number six. 
Evidence that the alien has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for organizations and establishments 
that have a distinguished reputation. 
In his decision, the director determined that the beneficiary did not meet this criterion because the petitioner failed 
to show that the tournaments participated in by the beneficiary did not have a distinguished reputation. The 
director failed to consider any of the evidence regarding the beneficiary's employment as a coach. 
The record contains evidence that the beneficiary was a coach at the 
 in Katmandu, Nepal 
from 2000 to 2004 and the Assistant Coach for the Nepal National Sports Council Training and Coaching 
Department (NNSCTCD) from 2002 to 2004. The petitioner also submits a letter from- 
Founder of the Maitri Taekwondo Dojang which indicates that the beneficiary was the chief training coach for the 
Maim Taekwondo Dojang for the 1" and 2"d International Friendship Taekwondo Championships. The record, 
however, is absent evidence which demonstrates that these schools have a distinguished reputation. Moreover, we 
LIN 05 193 53002 
Page 6 
do not find that the beneficiary's position as an assistant coach demonstrates that she was employed in a "critical" 
or "essential" capacity for the NNSCTCD. 
Despite our finding regarding the lack of evidence related to the reputation of these schools, we note that the 
record contains significant evidence which demonstrates that the beneficiary was a coach of Nepal's national team. 
Specifically, the letter from President of the Nepal Olympic Committee, indicates that the 
beneficiary became a national coach in 1998. The record also contains several certificates and copies of 
credentials which show that the beneficiary was a coach of the national team. We find such evidence sufficient to 
establish that the beneficiary has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for organizations and 
establishments that have a distinguished reputation. 
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. 
With the initial filing, the petitioner did not provide any argument or offer any evidence to establish that the 
beneficiary meets thls criterion. In the director's request for evidence, the director noted that that the beneficiary's 
proffered annual salary of $33,020 did not appear to be considered high in comparison to other coaches or scouts 
in the Portland, Oregon area. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for evidence or on 
appeal. 
The petitioner has not established that the beneficiary meets ths criterion. 
Based upon the above discussion, we find that the petitioner has established that the beneficiary is an alien of 
extraordinary ability in the field of athletics who has demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim and 
has satisfied three of the eight criteria. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. 
The petitioner has met that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be sustained. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is sustained. The petition is approved.