EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided 2018Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB052018_01B2203
AwardsMetJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A kickboxer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed five criteria but the AAO found only one met: awards. Membership, published material, judging, and critical role were all rejected for insufficient documentation or failure to meet regulatory requirements. The petition was dismissed.
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 criterion; two third place finishes documented
What was missing
- Judging · Certificate shows assignment only; no evidence petitioner awarded points or chose winners
- Leading or critical role · Membership not established; no documentation of contribution to team success or distinguished reputation
- Membership · Membership not established; documentation did not show required outstanding achievements
- Published material · Website screenshot about team, not petitioner; missing author; not major publication
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to meet three criteria threshold; aggregate review does not support extraordinary ability
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Met | Director found petitioner met criterion; two third place finishes documented |
 Judging | Not met | Certificate shows assignment only; no evidence petitioner awarded points or chose winners |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Membership not established; no documentation of contribution to team success or distinguished reputation |
 Membership | Not met | Membership not established; documentation did not show required outstanding achievements |
 Published material | Not met | Website screenshot about team, not petitioner; missing author; not major publication |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to meet three criteria threshold; aggregate review does not support extraordinary ability |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.