EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided 2009Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Feb172009_03B2203
AwardsMetJudgingNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A karate competitor filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability through awards, membership, media coverage, and judging criteria. The AAO found one criterion met but concluded the overall evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the small percentage at the very top of the field. Appeal 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 · Petitioner demonstrated lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence in karate competition.
What was missing
- Judging · Counsel no longer asserted this criterion on motion and petitioner did not establish it.
- Membership · Romanian national team membership and Merited Master of Sport title insufficient without official requirements documentation.
- Published material · Petitioner failed to establish that media coverage constitutes major media about the petitioner.
- Final merits · Evidence shows talent but does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Met | Petitioner demonstrated lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence in karate competition. |
 Judging | Not met | Counsel no longer asserted this criterion on motion and petitioner did not establish it. |
 Membership | Not met | Romanian national team membership and Merited Master of Sport title insufficient without official requirements documentation. |
 Published material | Not met | Petitioner failed to establish that media coverage constitutes major media about the petitioner. |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows talent but does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.