Chapter 2 - Extraordinary Ability

A. Eligibility

When seeking classification as a person of extraordinary ability, a petitioner files an Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Form I-140) on behalf of a noncitizen (who may be the petitioner) with evidence demonstrating that the beneficiary is eligible.^[1]

Eligibility for Extraordinary Ability Classification
The person has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim, and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation.
The person seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability.
The person's entry into the United States will substantially benefit the United States in the future.

Self-Petitioners

A petition filed on behalf of a person with extraordinary ability does not need to be supported by a job offer; therefore, anyone can file the petition on behalf of the person, including the noncitizen who may file as a self-petitioner.^[2] The person must still demonstrate, however, that he or she intends to continue work in the area of his or her extraordinary ability and that his or her work will substantially benefit the United States in the future.^[3]

1. Sustained National or International Acclaim

When filing a petition for a person with extraordinary ability, the petitioner must submit evidence that the person has sustained national or international acclaim and that the person's achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise.^[4] In determining whether the beneficiary has enjoyed "sustained" national or international acclaim, the officer should consider that such acclaim must be maintained.^[5] However, the term sustained does not imply an age limit on the beneficiary. A beneficiary may be very young or early in his or her career and still be able to show sustained acclaim. There is also no definitive time frame on what constitutes sustained.

If a person was recognized for a particular achievement, the officer should determine whether the person continues to maintain a comparable level of acclaim in the field of expertise since the person was originally afforded that recognition. A person may, for example, have achieved national or international acclaim in the past but then failed to maintain a comparable level of acclaim thereafter.

2. Continuing to Work in the Area of Expertise

To qualify as a person with extraordinary ability, the beneficiary must intend to continue to work in the area of his or her expertise.^[6]

The officer may encounter instances where it is difficult to determine whether the person’s intended employment falls sufficiently within the bounds of his or her area of extraordinary ability. Some of the most problematic cases are those in which the beneficiary’s sustained national or international acclaim is based on his or her abilities as an athlete, but the beneficiary’s intent is to come to the United States and be employed as an athletic coach or manager. Competitive athletics and coaching rely on different sets of skills and in general are not in the same area of expertise. However, many extraordinary athletes have gone on to be extraordinary coaches.

Therefore, in general, if a beneficiary has clearly achieved recent national or international acclaim as an athlete and has sustained that acclaim in the field of coaching or managing at a national level, officers can consider the totality of the evidence as establishing an overall pattern of sustained acclaim and extraordinary ability such that USCIS can conclude that coaching is within the beneficiary’s area of expertise.

Where the beneficiary has had an extended period of time to establish his or her reputation as a coach beyond the years in which he or she had sustained national or international acclaim as an athlete, depending on the specific facts, officers may place heavier, or exclusive, weight on the evidence of the beneficiary’s achievements as a coach or a manager.

3. Entry to Substantially Benefit the United States

To qualify as a person with extraordinary ability, the person’s entry must substantially benefit the United States in the future.^[7] Although neither the statute nor the regulations specifically define the statutory phrase “substantially benefit,” it has been interpreted broadly.^[8]

Whether the petitioner demonstrates that the person’s employment meets this requirement requires a fact-dependent assessment of the case. There is no standard rule as to what will substantially benefit the United States. In some cases, a Request for Evidence (RFE) may be appropriate if an officer is not yet satisfied that the petitioner has met this requirement.

B. Evidence of Extraordinary Ability

The regulations describe various types of evidence that the petitioner must submit in support of a petition as documentation of the beneficiary’s extraordinary ability.^[9] In general, the petitioner must submit evidence that:

The person has sustained national or international acclaim; and
The person’s achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise.

This initial evidence must include either evidence of a one-time achievement (for example, a major internationally recognized award, such as the Nobel Prize) or at least three of the types of evidence listed in the regulations.^[10]

The evidence provided in support of the petition need not specifically use the words "extraordinary." Rather, the material should be such that it is readily apparent that the person's contributions to the field are qualifying. Also, although some of the regulatory language relating to evidence occasionally uses plurals, it is entirely possible that the presentation of a single piece of evidence in a specific evidentiary category may be sufficient.

On the other hand, the submission of voluminous documentation may not contain sufficient persuasive evidence to establish the beneficiary’s eligibility. The evidence provided in support of the petition must ultimately establish that the beneficiary "is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor."^[11]

1. Letters of Endorsement

Many petitions to classify a person with extraordinary ability contain letters of endorsement. Letters of endorsement, while not without weight, should not form the cornerstone of a successful claim for this classification. Rather, the statements made by the witnesses should be corroborated by documentary evidence in the record. The letters should explain in specific terms why the witnesses believe the beneficiary to be of the caliber of a person with extraordinary ability. Letters that merely reiterate USCIS’ definitions relating to this classification or make general and expansive statements regarding the beneficiary and his or her accomplishments are generally not persuasive.

The relationship or affiliation between the beneficiary and the witness is also a factor the officer should consider when evaluating the significance of witnesses’ statements. It is generally expected that one whose accomplishments have garnered sustained national or international acclaim would have received recognition for his or her accomplishments well beyond the circle of his or her personal and professional acquaintances.

In some cases, letters from others in the beneficiary’s field may merely make general assertions about the beneficiary, and at most, indicate that the beneficiary is a competent, respected figure within the field of endeavor, but the record lacks sufficient, concrete evidence supporting such statements. These letters should be considered, but do not necessarily show the beneficiary’s claimed extraordinary ability.

2. Two-Step Analysis of Evidence

Officers should use a two-step analysis to evaluate the evidence submitted with the petition to demonstrate eligibility for classification as a person with extraordinary ability.^[12]

Petition for Extraordinary Ability Classification: Overview of Two-Step Evidentiary Review
Step 1	Assess whether evidence meets regulatory criteria: Determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, which evidence submitted by the petitioner objectively meets the parameters of the regulatory description that applies to that type of evidence (referred to as "regulatory criteria").
Step 2	Final merits determination: Evaluate all the evidence together when considering the petition in its entirety for the final merits determination, in the context of the high level of expertise required for this immigrant classification.

Assess Whether Evidence Meets Any Regulatory Criteria

The first step of the evidentiary review is limited to determining whether the evidence submitted with the petition meets the regulatory criteria.^[13] The evidence must be comprised of either a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized award) or at least three of the ten regulatory criteria.^[14] The officer should apply a preponderance of the evidence standard when making this determination.

For purposes of the first step of the analysis, officers should consider the quality and caliber of the evidence to determine whether a particular regulatory criterion has been met, to the extent the criterion has qualitative requirements.^[15] Officers should not yet make a determination regarding whether or not the person is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field or if the person has sustained national or international acclaim.^[16]

Appendix: Extraordinary Ability Petitions - First Step of Reviewing Evidence [6 USCIS-PM F.2, Appendices Tab] describes the limited determinations the officer should make in the first step of the analysis to determine whether the person has met the applicable evidentiary criteria, including any qualifying comparable evidence.^[17]

Notably, the evidence evaluated in this step is also reviewed in the next step where the officer must determine whether the person is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor, and that he or she has sustained national or international acclaim.

However, objectively meeting the regulatory criteria in the first step alone does not establish that the person in fact meets the requirements for classification as a person with extraordinary ability.^[18]

For example:

Participating in the judging of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization alone, regardless of the circumstances, should satisfy the regulatory criteria in the first step of the analysis. However, the second step requires the officer to evaluate the person's participation to determine whether it was indicative of the person being one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor and enjoying sustained national or international acclaim.
Publishing scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media alone, regardless of the caliber, should satisfy the regulatory criteria in the first step of the analysis. However, the second step requires the officer to evaluate the person's publications to determine whether they were indicative of the person being one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor and enjoying sustained national or international acclaim.

The question of whether the person is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor and enjoys sustained national or international acclaim should be addressed in the second step of the analysis (final merits determination). In the first step, the officer is only required to determine if the evidence objectively meets the regulatory criteria.

Final Merits Determination

Meeting the minimum requirement of providing required initial evidence does not, in itself, establish that the person in fact meets the requirements for extraordinary ability classification.^[19] As part of the final merits determination, the quality of the evidence should also be considered, such as whether the judging responsibilities were internal and whether the scholarly articles (if inherent to the occupation) are cited by others in the field.

In the second step of the analysis, the officer should evaluate the evidence together and consider the petition in its entirety to make a final merits determination of whether or not the petitioner has demonstrated that the person has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise, indicating that the person is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. The officer applies a preponderance of the evidence standard when making this determination.

An officer cannot predetermine the kind of evidence he or she thinks the person should be able to submit and deny the petition if that particular type of evidence (whether one of the prescribed types^[20] or comparable evidence^[21]) is absent. For example, an officer may think that if a person is extraordinary, there should be published articles about the person and his or her work. However, an officer cannot deny the petition because no published articles were submitted, so long as the petitioner has submitted evidence meeting the three qualifying criteria that demonstrates the person is in fact extraordinary. Approval or denial of a petition must be based on the type and quality of evidence submitted rather than assumptions about the failure to address different criteria.

While a person may be stronger in one particular evidentiary area than in others, the overall impression should be that he or she is extraordinary. If the officer determines that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate eligibility, the officer should not merely make general assertions regarding this failure. Rather, the officer must articulate the specific reasons as to why the officer concludes that the petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the person has extraordinary ability.^[22] As with all adjudications, if an officer believes that the facts stated in the petition are not true, and can articulate why in the denial, then the officer denies the petition and explains the reasons in the written denial.^[23]

If requesting additional evidence is appropriate, officers should provide some explanation of the deficiencies in the evidence already submitted and, if possible, examples of persuasive evidence that the petitioner might provide to corroborate the statements made in the petition. If a petitioner has submitted evidence that he or she believes establishes the person's extraordinary ability, merely restating the evidentiary requirements or stating that the evidence submitted is insufficient does not clarify to the petitioner how to overcome the deficiencies.

3. Evaluating Petitions Filed on Behalf of O-1 Nonimmigrants

An officer might encounter a case where a petition is filed on behalf of a person who was previously classified as an O-1 nonimmigrant with extraordinary ability, or extraordinary achievement in the case of persons in the motion picture and television industry.^[24] Though the prior approval of an O-1 petition may be a relevant consideration in adjudicating an immigrant petition for a person with extraordinary ability, it is not determinative. Eligibility as an O-1 nonimmigrant does not automatically establish eligibility for immigrant extraordinary ability classification.

Each petition is separate and independent and must be adjudicated on its own merits, under the corresponding statutory and regulatory provisions. Moreover, the O-1 nonimmigrant classification has different definitions and standards for persons in the arts and the motion picture and television industry when compared to the definition and standard set forth for the immigrant with extraordinary ability.

For example, a person in the arts may have extraordinary ability under the O-1 category because he or she has “distinction,” which is the definition for a nonimmigrant with extraordinary ability in the arts; but does not meet the definition for “extraordinary ability” according to the immigrant criteria, which is that he or she is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

Notwithstanding the fact that each petition must be adjudicated on its own merits, some courts have asked USCIS to provide an explanation as to why, if the person had previously been classified in a roughly analogous nonimmigrant category, USCIS has determined that the person is not eligible for classification in the employment-based immigrant visa classification in question.

For this reason, where possible, officers issuing denials in such cases should provide a brief discussion as to why, notwithstanding the previous O-1 nonimmigrant visa petition approval, the petitioner has failed to meet its burden to establish the beneficiary’s eligibility for approval of the immigrant petition for classification as a person with extraordinary ability.

Footnotes

[^ 1] See INA 203(b)(1)(A). See 8 CFR 204.5(h).

[^ 2] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(5). See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(1) (providing that “[a]n alien, or any person on behalf of the alien,” may file the petition).

[^ 3] See INA 203(b)(1)(A)(ii)-(iii).

[^ 4] See INA 203(b)(1)(A)(i). See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 5] According to Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019), the definition of sustain is "to support or maintain, especially over a long period of time . . . To persist in making (an effort) over a long period of time."

[^ 6] See INA 203(b)(1)(A)(ii). See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(5).

[^ 7] See INA 203(b)(1)(A)(iii).

[^ 8] See Matter of Price (PDF), 20 I&N Dec. 953 (Assoc. Comm. 1994) (golfer of beneficiary’s caliber will substantially benefit prospectively the United States given the popularity of the sport).

[^ 9] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)-(4).

[^ 10] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 11] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(2).

[^ 12] See Kazarian v. USCIS (PDF), 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010).

[^ 13] See Kazarian v. USCIS (PDF), 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010).

[^ 14] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 15] For example, in evaluating an award submitted under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(i), it is necessary to consider the level of recognition the award holds to determine whether it is “nationally or internationally recognized,” consistent with the requirements of the criterion. However, evidence that the beneficiary’s work was displayed at an artistic exhibition alone, regardless of caliber or significance, would satisfy the requirements of 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(vii).

[^ 16] See Kazarian v. USCIS (PDF), 596 F.3d 1115, 1122 (9th Cir. 2010).

[^ 17] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 18] See INA 203(b)(1)(A).

[^ 19] As described in INA 203(b)(1)(A).

[^ 20] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 21] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(4).

[^ 22] As described in INA 203(b)(1)(A).

[^ 23] See INA 204(b).

[^ 24] For more information on this classification, see Volume 2, Nonimmigrants, Part M, Nonimmigrants of Extraordinary Ability or Achievement (O) [2 USCIS-PM M].

Resources

8 CFR 204.5(h) - Aliens with extraordinary ability

8 CFR 204.5 - Petitions for employment-based immigrants

INA 201 - Worldwide level of immigration

INA 202 - Numerical limitations on individual foreign states

INA 203 - Allocation of immigrant visas

INA 203(b)(1) - Priority workers

INA 203(b)(1)(A) - Aliens with extraordinary ability

INA 203(b)(1), (2), (3) - Preference allocation for employment-based immigrants

INA 204, 8 CFR 204 - Procedure for granting immigrant status

G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative

I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker

I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion

I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status

Appendices

Step One: Review Evidence Submitted with Extraordinary Ability Petitions
Criterion^[1]	Scope of Review
Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor.^[2]	First, USCIS determines if the person was the recipient of prizes or awards. The description of this type of evidence in the regulation indicates that the focus should be on the person's receipt of the awards or prizes, as opposed to his or her employer's receipt of the awards or prizes. Second, USCIS determines whether the person has received lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor. Relevant considerations regarding whether the basis for granting the prizes or awards was excellence in the field include, but are not limited to: The criteria used to grant the awards or prizes; The national or international significance of the awards or prizes in the field; and The number of awardees or prize recipients, as well as any limitations on competitors (an award limited to competitors from a single institution, for example, may have little national or international significance).
Membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought that require outstanding achievement of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields.^[3]	USCIS determines if the association for which the person claims membership requires that members have outstanding achievements in the field as judged by recognized experts in that field. The petitioner must show that membership in the associations is based on the person being judged by recognized national or international experts as having attained outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is sought. For example, admission to membership in the National Academy of Sciences as a foreign associate requires candidates to be nominated by an academy member, and membership is ultimately granted based upon recognition of the candidate's distinguished achievements in original research.^[4] Associations may have multiple levels of membership. The level of membership afforded to the person must show that in order to obtain that level of membership, the person was judged by recognized national or international experts as having attained outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is sought. Relevant factors that may lead to a conclusion that the person's membership in the associations was not based on outstanding achievements in the field include, but are not limited to, instances where the person's membership was based: Solely on a level of education or years of experience in a particular field; On the payment of a fee or by subscribing to an association's publications; or On a requirement, compulsory or otherwise, for employment in certain occupations, such as union membership or guild affiliation for actors.
Published material about the person in professional or major trade publications or other major media relating to the person's work in the field for which classification is sought. Such evidence must include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation.^[5]	First, USCIS determines whether the published material was related to the person and the person's specific work in the field for which classification is sought. The published material should be about the person, relating to the person’s work in the field, not just about the person’s employer or another organization that the person is associated with. Marketing materials created for the purpose of selling the person's products or promoting the person’s services are not generally considered to be published material about the beneficiary. However, the person and the person’s work need not be the only subject of the material; published material that covers a broader topic but includes a substantial discussion of the person’s work in the field and mentions the person in connection to the work may be considered material “about” the person relating to the person’s work. Evidence may include documentation such as print or online newspaper or magazine articles, popular and academic journal articles, books, textbooks, similar publications, or a transcript of professional or major audio or video coverage of the person and the person’s work. Second, USCIS determines whether the publication qualifies as a professional publication, major trade publication, or major media publication. Evidence of published material in professional or major trade publications or in other major media publications about the person should establish that the circulation (online or in print) or viewership is high compared to other statistics and show who the intended audience is, as well as the title, date, and author of the material.
The person's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought.^[6]	USCIS determines whether the person has acted as the judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization. The petitioner must show that the person has not only been invited to judge the work of others, but also that the person actually participated in the judging of the work of others in the same or allied field of specialization. For example: Peer reviewing for a scholarly journal, as evidenced by a request from the journal to the person to do the review, accompanied by proof that the review was actually completed. Serving as a member of a Ph.D. dissertation committee that makes the final judgment as to whether a candidate's body of work satisfies the requirements for a doctoral degree, as evidenced by departmental records.
The person's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field.^[7]	First, USCIS determines whether the person has made original contributions in the field. Second, USCIS determines whether the person's original contributions are of major significance to the field. Officers must evaluate whether the original work constitutes major, significant contributions to the field. Although funded and published work may be "original," this fact alone is not sufficient to establish that the work is of major significance. For example, peer-reviewed presentations at academic symposia or peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that have provoked widespread commentary or received notice from others working in the field, or entries (particularly a goodly number) in a citation index that cite the person's work as authoritative in the field, may be probative of the significance of the person's contributions to the field of endeavor. Officers should take into account the probative analysis that experts in the field may provide in opinion letters regarding the significance of the person's contributions in order to assist in giving an assessment of the person's original contributions of major significance. That said, not all expert letters provide such analysis. Letters that specifically articulate how the person's contributions are of major significance to the field and their impact on subsequent work add value. Letters that lack specifics and simply use hyperbolic language do not add value and are not considered to be probative evidence that may form the basis for meeting this criterion.
The person's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media.^[8]	First, USCIS determines whether the person has authored scholarly articles in the field. As defined in the academic arena, a scholarly article reports on original research, experimentation, or philosophical discourse. It is written by a researcher or expert in the field who is often affiliated with a college, university, or research institution. In general, it should have footnotes, endnotes, or a bibliography, and may include graphs, charts, videos, or pictures as illustrations of the concepts expressed in the article. For other fields, a scholarly article should be written for learned persons in that field. ("Learned" is defined as "having or demonstrating profound knowledge or scholarship").^[9] Learned persons include all persons having profound knowledge of a field. Second, USCIS determines whether the publication qualifies as a professional publication, major trade publication, or major media publication. Evidence of published material in professional or major trade publications or in other major media publications should establish that the circulation (online or in print) is high compared to other circulation statistics and who the intended audience of the publication is.
Display of the person's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases.^[10]	First, USCIS determines whether the work that was displayed is the person's work product. The description of this type of evidence in the regulation provides that the work must be the person's. Second, USCIS determines whether the venues (virtual or otherwise) where the person's work was displayed were artistic exhibitions or showcases. Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines exhibition as a public showing (as of works of art, objects of manufacture, or athletic skill).^[11]
The person has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.^[12]	First, USCIS determines whether the person has performed in a leading or critical role for an organization, establishment, or a division or department of an organization or establishment. In evaluating such evidence, officers examine whether the role is (or was) leading or critical. For a leading role, officers look at whether the evidence establishes that the person is (or was) a leader within the organization or establishment or a division or department thereof. A title, with appropriate matching duties, can help to establish that a role is (or was), in fact, leading. For a critical role, officers look at whether the evidence establishes that the person has contributed in a way that is of significant importance to the outcome of the organization or establishment's activities or those of a division or department of the organization or establishment. A supporting role may be considered "critical" if the person's performance in the role is (or was) important in that way. It is not the title of the person's role, but rather the person's performance in the role that determines whether the role is (or was) critical. This is one criterion where letters from persons with personal knowledge of the significance of the person's leading or critical role can be particularly helpful to officers in making this determination, so long as the letters contain detailed and probative information that specifically addresses how the person's role for the organization, establishment, division, or department was leading or critical. Evidence of experience must consist of letters from employers.^[13] Second, USCIS determines whether the organization or establishment, or the department or division for which the person holds or held a leading or critical role, has a distinguished reputation. The relative size or longevity of an organization or establishment is not in and of itself a determining factor but is considered together with other information to determine whether a distinguished reputation exists. Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines distinguished as marked by eminence, distinction, or excellence or befitting an eminent person.^[14]
The person has commanded a high salary, or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field.^[15]	USCIS determines whether the person's salary or remuneration is high relative to the compensation paid to others working in the field. Evidence regarding whether the person's compensation is high relative to that of others working in the field may take many forms. If the petitioner is claiming to meet this criterion, then the burden is on the petitioner to provide appropriate evidence. Examples may include, but are not limited to, geographical or position-appropriate compensation surveys and organizational justifications to pay above the compensation data. Officers may find the following websites helpful in evaluating the evidence provided by the petitioner: The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Overview of BLS Wage Data by Area and Occupation webpage; The Department of Labor's Career One Stop website; and The Department of Labor's Office of Foreign Labor Certification Online Wage Library. Persons working in different countries should be evaluated based on the wage statistics or comparable evidence in that country, rather than by simply converting the salary to U.S. dollars and then viewing whether that salary would be considered high in the United States.
Commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales.^[16]	USCIS determines whether the person has enjoyed commercial successes in the performing arts. This criterion focuses on volume of sales and box office receipts as a measure of the person's commercial success in the performing arts. Therefore, the mere fact that a person has recorded and released musical compilations or performed in theatrical, motion picture, or television productions would be insufficient, in and of itself, to meet this criterion. The evidence must show that the volume of sales and box office receipts reflect the person's commercial success relative to others involved in similar pursuits in the performing arts.
Comparable evidence to establish the person's eligibility if the standards do not readily apply to the beneficiary's occupation.^[17]	USCIS determines if the evidence submitted is comparable to the evidence required in 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3). This regulatory provision provides petitioners the opportunity to submit “comparable” evidence to establish the person beneficiary's eligibility, if it is determined that the standards described in the regulations do not readily apply to the person's occupation. When evaluating such comparable evidence, officers must consider whether the regulatory criteria are readily applicable to the person's occupation and, if not, whether the evidence provided is truly comparable to the criteria listed in that regulation. General assertions that any of the ten objective criteria described in the regulations do not readily apply to the person's occupation are not probative and should be discounted. Similarly, claims that USCIS should accept witness letters as comparable evidence are not persuasive. On the other hand, the following are examples of where the comparable evidence provision might apply. A person who is an Olympic coach whose athlete wins an Olympic medal while under the person's principal tutelage would likely constitute evidence comparable to that in 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(v). Election to a national all-star or Olympic team might serve as comparable evidence for evidence of memberships in 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(ii). There is no comparable evidence for the one-time achievement of a major, international recognized award.

Footnotes

[^ 1] In some cases, evidence relevant to one criterion may be relevant to other criteria set forth in 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3).

[^ 2] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(i).

[^ 3] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(ii).

[^ 4] See National Academic of Sciences website.

[^ 5] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iii).

[^ 6] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iv).

[^ 7] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(v).

[^ 8] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(vi).

[^ 9] See Webster's II New College Dictionary (3rd ed. 2005).

[^ 10] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(vii).

[^ 11] See Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s definition of “exhibition.”

[^ 12] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(viii).

[^ 13] See 8 CFR 204.5(g)(1).

[^ 14] See Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s definition of “distinguished.”

[^ 15] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(ix).

[^ 16] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(x).

[^ 17] See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(4).

Updates

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is updating the USCIS Policy Manual to align existing guidance on certain first preference immigrants with a recent Policy Manual update relating to nonimmigrants of extraordinary ability.

Version History

No historical versions available.