U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

MATTER OF C-B-P-

APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION

Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office

DATE: OCT. 27, 2016

PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER

The Petitioner, a self-described agent representative, seeks to classifY the Beneficiary as an individual of extraordinary ability in the athletics. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(0)(i), 8 U.S.(:.§ 1101(a)(15)(0)(i). This 0-1 classification makes nonimmigrant visas available to foreign nationals who can demonstrate their extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation.

The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the exhibits did not satisfy the evidentiary requirements applicable to foreign nationals of extraordinary ability in the athletics, pursuant to 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(A) (a major, internationally recognized award) or (B) (at least three of eight possible forms of documentation). The Petitioner subsequently filed a motion to reopen and reconsider. The Director denied the motion to reconsider, granted the motion to reopen, and reaffirmed her previous decision to deny the petition.

The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence and maintains that the Director erred in determining that the Beneficiary is not eligible for the classification sought.

Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.

I. LAW

Section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Act provides classification to a qualified beneficiary who has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics that has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim, whose achievements have been recognized in the field througbl extensive documentation, and who seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability. The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(ii) provides, 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."

(b)(6)

Matter ofC-B-P-

The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate a beneficiary's sustained acclaim and the recognition of the individual's achievements in the field through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If the petitioner does not submit this evidence, then it must submit sufficient qualifying evidence that meets at least three of the eight categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(3)(iii)(B)(l)-( 8). If the petitioner demonstrates that the criteria in paragraph ( o )(3)(iii) of this section do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation, it may submit comparable evidence in order to establish the inqividual's eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(iii)(C).

The submission of documents relating to at least three criteria does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for 0-1 classification. See 59 Fed. Reg. 41818, 41820 (Aug. 15, 1994). In addition, we have held that, "truth is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality." Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). That decision explains that, pursuant to the preponderance of the evidence standard, we "must examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true." !d. Accordingly, where a petitioner submits qualifying evidence under at least three criteria, we will determine whether the totality of the record shows sustained national or international acclaim '\nd demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor.

Further, the regulation at 8 C.F .R. § 214.2( o )(2)(ii) sets forth evidence that must accompany petitions for 0 foreign nationals, which includes documentation relating to the terms of the proposed employment and the nature of the activities and events in which the beneficiary will participate.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Introduction

The Petitioner filed the Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, and supporting documentation, seeking employment for the Beneficiary as a college volleyball coach for a period of three years. The Beneficiary is a year-old volleyball expert whose background in athletics includes experience as a professional volleyball player and coach in the her native country. The record shows that, between and the Beneficiary competed as a professional volleyball player for teams in several countries including the

and The Beneficiary indicated on her resume that between and she was the head coach of the senior women's volleyball team

and also headed the team's youth selections. In 2014 she was issued the professional title Operating Volleyball Coach from the The record also demonstrates that the Beneficiary has been a volunteer volleyball coach for

The Petitioner's initial submission included a signed agency agreement between himself and the Beneficiary, and a signed offer of employment from indicating that it will employ her as head coach of its men's volleyball team and assistant coach of its women's volleyball team. The

2

Matter ofC-B-P-

Director denied the petition, finding that the materials did not establish that the Beneficiary qualifies as a foreign national with extraordinary ability in the field of athletics. Specifically, that Director found that the exhibits did not satisfy the evidentiary criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(A) or three of the eight categories listed at 8 C.F .R. § 214.2( o )(3)(iii)(B)(l)-( 8). 1 The Petitioner filed a subsequent motion to reopen and reconsider. . The Director granted the Petitioner's motion to reopen, reaffirming the denial of the petition, and denied the motion to reconsider. In its appeal, the Petitioner offers a brief and maintains that the Director erred in determining that the record did not establish the Beneficiary's eligibility for the requested classification. After careful review of the record and for the reasons discussed herein, we conclude that the Beneficiary is not eligible for the classification sought.

B. Evidentiary Criteria

In denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner did not satisfy any of the eight evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B). Regarding the criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) subparagraphs (1), (2), (3), and (7), the Director discussed the submitted evidence and found that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary met these criteria. The Director further concluded that the Petitioner did not attempt to meet the evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(A), or 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) subparagraphs (.:f), (5), (6), and (8).

On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the submitted exhibits satisfY the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) subparagraphs (1), (2), and (3), but does not contest the Director's findings or offer additional arguments regarding the remaining criteria.

Documentation of the alien's receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor

The Director determined that the submitted materials do not establish that the Beneficiary satisfies the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(l), as the record does not include evidence of her receipt of any prizes or awards relating to her coaching ability. Instead, the Petitioner maintains on

1 As noted by the Director in the request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner has not consistently identified and articulated under which regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) it is claiming eligibility. For example, in the Petitioner's initial letter in support of the petition, it characterized all of the submitted evidence under regulatory criteria found at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o )(3)(iv)(B), relating to foreign nationals of extraordinary ability in the arts. Specifically, the Petitioner indicated it was submitting evidence that "the [B]eneficiary has performed, and will perform, services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events" consistent with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o )(3)(iv)(B)(J), "the Beneficiary has achieved national or international recognition for achievements" consistent with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(2), "the [B]eneficiary has performed, and will perform, in a lead, starring or critical role for organizations and establishments" consistent with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(3)(iv)(B)(J), and "the [B]eneficiary has received significant recognition for achievements" consistent with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(5). The Ninth Circuit has determined that once U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) concludes that a foreign national is not eligible for the specifically requested classification, the agency is not required to consider, sua sponte, whether the foreign national is eligible for an alternate classification. Brazil Quality Stones, Inc., v. Chert off, Slip Copy, 286 Fed. Appx. 963 (91

h Cir. July I 0, 2008).

3

(b)(6)

Matter ofC-B-P-

appeal that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion based upon prizes and awards she received as an athlete in national professional volleyball competition. As noted by the Director, the Petitioner has provided a number of photographs of the Beneficiary participating in volleyball tournaments, and of trophies and medals. The photographs include typewritten notations, describing the events, trophies, and awards featured in the photographs. The actua,l photographs, however, are not sufficient to corroborate the typewritten notations. (

In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner provided a letter from Secretary of the stating that the Beneficiary participated in the ' for 10 years in a variety of countries," and noting that the records of the reflect that the Beneficiary "was awarded a Gold and Silver Medals from Austrian, Romanian and Greek national Championships."

On motion, the Petitioner submitted a letter from president of the providing his "expert opinion regarding the significance of the various medals which

have been won by [the Beneficiary] and to confirm her receipt of these awards." attested to the Beneficiary's receipt of the following awards as a competitive volleyball athlete:

)

• 2002-

• 2005-

• 2005-

• 2006-

• 2006-

He stated that these awards "represent a major recognized award within the world of professional competitive volleyball in Europe." The Petitioner also provided a letter from president and coach of the professional volleyball team in Romania, who confirmed that in playing for the team in 2006 the Beneficiary won gold and silver medals in the finals of the

which he described as the "the highest volleyball awards in our country."

users 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 'r. 1988). However, USC IS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding a foreign national's eligibility for the benefit sought. !d. The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; users may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support the foreign national's eligibility. See id. at 795. USCIS may give less weight to an opinion that is not corroborated, in accord with other information or is in1any way questionable. !d. at 795; see also Sojjici, 22 I&N Dec. at 165 (citing Matter ofTreasure Craft o.fCal(fornia, 14 I&N Dec. at 190).

Upon review, the letters do not establish the significance or scope of the tournaments or the national or international recognition conveyed on the Beneficiary as a result of her performance. A competition may be open to individuals from throughout a particular country or countries, but this

4

(b)(6)

Matter ofC-B-P-

factor alone is not adequate to establish that an award or prize is "nationally or interna~ionally recognized." The burden is on the Petitioner to demonstrate the level achievement associated with the Beneficiary's awards, and to document that the distinction enjoys recognition beyond the orgamzmg entity. The Petitioner has not sufficiently identified the competitions at which the Beneficiary received the stated awards, or provided adequate evidence showing that these awards enjoy national or international recognition. Further, the letters were not accompanied by other evidence that would sufficiently establish the stature of the tournaments in which the Beneficiary competed.

The Petitioner submitted translations of numerous foreign language articles that mention the Beneficiary. Although not addressed by the Director, the submitted translations do not comport with the regulation at 8 C.P.R.§ 103.2(b)(3), since none are accompanied by the translator's certification that he or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English, and many of the translations are summary translations rather than representing the whole foreign language document, or clearly omit sentences or passages from the foreign language document. In addition, the Petitioner has not provided any translation for several foreign language articles. The regulation states: "Any document containing foreign language submitted to USCIS shall be accompanied by a full English language translation which the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the translator's certification that he or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English." Because these translations do not comply with 8 C.P.R. § 103.2(b)(3), they have significantly diminished probative value.

While most of the articles mention the Beneficiary's results in professional competitions, the articles do not sufficiently identify the competitions in which she received the awards, or demonstrate their national or international recognition as required by the plain language of the regulation. As a result, the evidence is insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary's professional competitive volleyball career resulted in her receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for volleyball excellence.

Regarding the Beneficiary's work as a volleyball coach, the Beneficiary's resume indicates that she was the head coach of the senior women's volleyball team in In its initial filing, the Petitioner provided a letter from a professional volleyball player, stating that the Beneficiary began coaching her team in 2013, when the team rose from place to place in the league. In addition, three letters from officials at confirmed that the Beneficiary was a volunteer assistant coach of the school's women's volleyball team in 2014, when the team advanced to semifinal competition in the None of the submitted testimonial letters indicate that the Beneficiary has received nationally or internationally recognized awards for coaching, or that she has coached students who have received such awards or who compete at the national level.

In summary, the evidence is insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary's professional competitive volleyball career resulted in her receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for volleyball excellence or that she has received a nationally or internationally recognized award for

5

(b)(6)

Matter ofC-B-P-

excellence as a volleyball instructor or coach. Accordingly, we concur with the Director's conclusion that the Beneficiary has not submitted evidence that meets this criterion.

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 order to demonstrate that membership in an association meets this criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(2), a petitioner must show that the association requires outstanding achievement as an essential condition for admission to membership. Membership requirements based only on employment or activity in a given field, minimum education or experience, standardized test scores, grade point average, recommendations by colleagues or current members, or payment of dues, do not satisfy this criterion, as such requirements do not constitute outstanding achievements. Further, the overall prestige of a given association is not determinative; the issue is membership requirements rather than the association's overall reputation. The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion.

The Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion based upon her educational background, specifically having obtained the title of from "the

On appeal the Petitioner provides a translation of the Beneficiary's foreign certification, but does not include the foreign language document. Thus, the English translation of the certification does not meet the regulatory requirement under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), for the reasons previously discussed, and has significantly diminished probative value. Even if the Petitioner had submitted a qualifying translation, he has not established how the Beneficiary's title of an constitutes membership in an association.

The Petitioner also avers that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion based upon her membership in the the and on teams playing in the

First, the Petiti~ner has not provided sufficient evidence to document the Beneficiary's membership in the On appeal, the Petitioner provides a translation of the Beneficiary's foreign membership certificate, but does not include the foreign language document. See 8 C.F.R .. § 103.2(b)(3). Regardless, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence relating to the membership requirements of this association. In response to the RFE, the Petitioner submitted a letter from Secretary of the stating that membership in the association "is limited and exclusive." The Petitioner has not provided evidence regarding the membership eligibility criteria (such as bylaws or rules of admission) establishing that the association requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by recognized national or international volleyball experts.

2 Statements made without supporting documentary evidence are of limited probative value and are not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter ofSoffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter ofTreasure Craft of California, 14 l&N Dec. 190 (Reg'! Comm'r 1972)).. -

6

(b)(6)

Mqtter ofC-B-P-

The Petitioner also avers that the Beneficiary satisfies this criterion as a player on professional volleyball teams and as a coach of the volleyball team. The evidence in the record does not support the Petitioner's contention that such positions would meet the requirements of this criterion. The record indicates that the Beneficiary, as a competitive volleyball athlete, played for several professional volleyball teams in Europe between and including

and On appeal, the Petitioner emphasizes that those teams are "the Highest level

Professional teams," and provides information from the indicating that the federation is the world governing body of all forms of volleyball. The Petitioner's resume further indicates that she "[p ]layed for the [ n ]ational team of from until "

In its initial submission, the Petitioner provided a letter from president of the and a coach of the volleyball team from

confirming that the Beneficiary "was in our team ( and ~". Also within the initial submission are two foreign-language documents published in newspapers in and that mention the Beneficiary's membership on a "national team." As previously discussed, the submitted translations of these foreign language documents do not comport with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3), and thus have significantly diminished probative value. The

document is a team photograph that includes the Beneficiary and an article summary that states the Petitioner did not provide the original

foreign-language article. The document is a team photograph that includes the Beneficiary and an article summarized as,

' In response to the RFE, Secretary of stated that the Beneficiary "played for the of for years, which enjoyed tremendous success with her participation."

The Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary has played on "national teams" in the sport of volleyball and that she was a coach of the volleyball team. While an athletic team is not strictly speaking an "association," it is nonetheless equally true that an athlete can earn a place on a national or an Olympic team only through rigorous competition which separates the very best from the great majority of participants in a given sport. Therefore, an athlete's or coach's membership on an Olympic team or a major national team such as a World Cup team may serve to meet this criterion as such teams are limited in the number of members and have a rigorous selection process. We reiterate, however, that it is the Petitioner's burden to demonstrate that the Beneficiary meets every element of a given criterion, including that she is a member of a team that requires outstanding achievements of its members, as judged by recognized national or international experts. We will not presume that every national team is sufficiently exclusive. Here, the evidence submitted is not sufficient to support the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficiary has played on or coached a "national team," such as one selected to represent a country in the sport's or at the The above-rerefenced letters and articles do not provide sufficient information identifying the specific national team/s of which the Beneficiary was a member and the qualifications required to become part of the team. At most, it appears that the Beneficiary has

Matter ofC-B-P-

competed and coached on one or more professional volleyball teams that competed at a national level, and participated, while a junior player, as a member of a "national team"of unknown exclusivity. The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary's selection to compete on behalf of any of those teams constitutes outstanding achievements. Accordingly, the Beneficiary does not meet 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 classification is sought

The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary satisfies the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(3). The Petitioner submitted translations of numerous foreign language articles that mention the Beneficiary. As previously discussed, the English translations do not comport with the regulation at 8 C.F .R. § 103 .2(b )(3 ). Even if the Petitioner had submitted qualifying translations, we agree with the Director's finding that the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that the Beneficiary meets this criterion.

Most of the articles mention the Beneficiary's results in professional competitions. Several of the articles are interviews with the Beneficiary, and are therefore "about" her as required. In an initial letter, the Petitioner indicated circulation and readership figures for several of the publications in which the articles appear. However, without documentary evidence to support the claim, such statements are not sufficient to satisfy the Petitioner's burden of proof. See Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. at 165. The record, therefore, does not establish that these publications could be classified as professional publications, major trade publications, or major media, as opposed to local or regional sports media coverage.

III. CONCLUSION

The Petitioner has not submitted evidence that the Beneficiary has received a major, internationally recognized award pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(A), and the exhibits do not satisfy at least three of the evidentiary criteria specified in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(3)(iii)(B). Consequently, the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary is eligible for the 0-1 visa classification as a foreign national with extraordinary ability in athletics.

For the above reasons, the Petitioner has not met its burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013).

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.

Cite as Matter ofC-B-P-, ID# 12012 (AAO Oct. 27, 2016)

8