EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR132005_01B2203
AwardsMetJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A power lifter from Uruguay seeking EB-1A classification claimed extraordinary ability through awards, judging, and organizational roles. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only one criterion met and rejecting claims of leading role and sustained acclaim as personal trainer.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
What the AAO accepted
- Awards · Director found petitioner met this criterion with power lifting awards from Uruguay
What was missing
- Judging · One-time judging service over three years before petition does not reflect sustained acclaim
- Leading or critical role · Attestations show valuable athlete but not critical or leading role as personal trainer
- Membership · Membership in athletic organizations does not establish eligibility as personal trainer
- Published material · Articles submitted did not focus on petitioner as power lifter or personal trainer
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria required for extraordinary ability finding
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Met | Director found petitioner met this criterion with power lifting awards from Uruguay |
 Judging | Not met | One-time judging service over three years before petition does not reflect sustained acclaim |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Attestations show valuable athlete but not critical or leading role as personal trainer |
 Membership | Not met | Membership in athletic organizations does not establish eligibility as personal trainer |
 Published material | Not met | Articles submitted did not focus on petitioner as power lifter or personal trainer |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria required for extraordinary ability finding |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.