Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided August 2024Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

AUG022024_01B2203

JudgingNot metPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A Taekwon-Do athlete from Kyrgyzstan seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner did not establish a major award or meet three evidentiary criteria; the judging and published material criteria were not satisfied, and the overall record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

Official PDF

The official PDF link for this decision is being verified.

Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.

No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.

What was missing

  • Judging · Certificate recognizing help judging at one three-day event insufficient without supporting detail on judging duties.
  • Published material · Interview article and TV appearance lack evidence of publication in major media or major trade publications; author not identified.
  • Final merits · Record in aggregate does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or place among small percentage at top of field.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingNot metCertificate recognizing help judging at one three-day event insufficient without supporting detail on judging duties.
Published materialNot metInterview article and TV appearance lack evidence of publication in major media or major trade publications; author not identified.
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not claimed or addressed; other criteria examined instead.
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not explicitly analyzed; deemed waived and not addressed in decision.
Final meritsNot metRecord in aggregate does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or place among small percentage at top of field.

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.