EB-1ASports and athleticsEmployerDecided 2006Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Aug162006_05B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Squash coach sought extraordinary ability classification based on prior achievements as competitive athlete and coaching credentials. The AAO found beneficiary must demonstrate sustained acclaim as coach, not as player, and evidence of awards, membership, publications, and contributions failed to establish top-level coaching distinction.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗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
- Awards · Prior awards as squash player not relevant to current role as coach or instructor
- Membership · Membership requirements based on employment, education, or dues do not constitute outstanding achievements
- Original contributions · Failed to demonstrate coaching contributions influenced field at national or international level
- Published material · Newspaper articles from 1980s lack certified translations and insufficient for sustained acclaim as coach
- Final merits · Beneficiary has not achieved sustained national or international acclaim as coach or instructor
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Prior awards as squash player not relevant to current role as coach or instructor |
 Membership | Not met | Membership requirements based on employment, education, or dues do not constitute outstanding achievements |
 Original contributions | Not met | Failed to demonstrate coaching contributions influenced field at national or international level |
 Published material | Not met | Newspaper articles from 1980s lack certified translations and insufficient for sustained acclaim as coach |
 Final merits | Not met | Beneficiary has not achieved sustained national or international acclaim as coach or instructor |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.