This appeal was not successful at this stage
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish a qualifying one-time achievement and satisfied only one of the required three evidentiary criteria (lesser awards). The high salary criterion, which the Director had found met, was reversed by the AAO.
2 more criteria would trigger a full merits review.
The petitioner, a former competitive tumbling gymnast with gold medals from World Championships and World Games events, and current circus show performer, sought EB-1A classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal after finding his top athletic awards did not qualify as a one-time achievement because the events lacked the global recognition of awards like the Nobel Prize or Olympic medals. Although the AAO reversed the Director on the lesser awards criterion (finding it met) and found the Director's dismissal of the athletic evidence improper, the petitioner still fell short of the three required criteria because the membership and high salary criteria were not established. The high salary finding by the Director was reversed when the AAO found the petitioner's actual wages, after removing non-taxable allowances, were unremarkable compared to peers. With only one criterion met, no final merits determination was required.
What worked: The petitioner successfully established the lesser internationally recognized awards criterion — his FIG-sanctioned World Championships, World Games, and World Cup gold medals were accepted as internationally recognized awards for excellence in the tumbling field. The AAO also recognized a valid nexus between his competitive athletic career and his current role as a circus performer.
What failed: World Championships and World Games medals were not accepted as a one-time achievement because the events lacked the broad global recognition of Nobel Prizes or Olympic medals — one article even called the World Games 'obscure.' The national team membership claim failed because no independent documentary proof of national championship results or official selection rules was submitted. The high salary claim failed because $140 was a per-performance rate (not hourly), and after deducting non-taxable allowances, wages were not demonstrably at the top of the field.
Takeaway: Athletes in non-Olympic sports should not rely solely on winning their field's top award to satisfy the one-time achievement standard; they must build a comprehensive evidentiary record across multiple criteria, with corroborating official documents (translated rules, independent results records) for each. Salary claims must be supported with clear hourly or annual wage comparisons that honestly account for non-cash compensation, using robust industry wage data.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-1A criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The petitioner successfully established the lesser internationally recognized awards criterion — his FIG-sanctioned World Championships, World Games, and World Cup gold medals were accepted as internationally recognized awards for excellence in the tumbling field
- The AAO also recognized a valid nexus between his competitive athletic career and his current role as a circus performer.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- World Championships and World Games medals were not accepted as a one-time achievement because the events lacked the broad global recognition of Nobel Prizes or Olympic medals — one article even called the World Games 'obscure.' The national team membership claim failed because no independent documentary proof of national championship results or official selection rules was submitted
- The high salary claim failed because $140 was a per-performance rate (not hourly), and after deducting non-taxable allowances, wages were not demonstrably at the top of the field.
Criterion-by-criterion breakdown
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Reversed in their favorAAO reversed the Director's denial; petitioner's gold medals at World Championships, World Games, and World Cup events in tumbling were found to be internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field. Director's finding that athletic achievements had no probative value given current circus performer role was also reversed.
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement
Not metPetitioner claimed membership on his country's national tumbling team. AAO found insufficient independent documentary evidence of national championship results and no official translated rules or selection procedures from the national federation.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration
Reversed in their favorDirector found this met; AAO reversed. Pay evidence was ambiguous — $140 was per-performance not hourly, non-taxable allowances inflated apparent salary, and after deducting allowances actual wages of ~$50,902 were not clearly at the top of the field based on limited comparative data.
Official competition results and FIG athlete profile documenting gold medals at World Championships, World Games, and World Cup tumbling events
Employer letter confirming petitioner was recruited based on athletic performance at the 2015 World Championship and relies on his athletic abilities for complex routines
Evidence that tumbling World Championships and World Games are sanctioned by FIG, the international governing body of gymnastics
World Games and World Championships medals as one-time achievements — media evidence showed the World Games was described as 'obscure' and received no U.S. broadcast coverage, falling short of Nobel/Olympic-level global recognition
Three letters attesting to national team membership requirements — lacked independent corroboration of petitioner's national championship results and no official translated selection rules were provided
High salary claim — $140 per-performance rate mischaracterized as hourly wage; after deducting non-taxable allowances, actual wages of ~$50,902 were not clearly at the top of the field; comparative Payscale data based on only 14 individuals deemed unreliable
Director erroneously concluded that petitioner's athletic achievements had 'no probative value' for the lesser awards criterion merely because he currently works as a circus performer, ignoring the clear nexus between his tumbling athletic skills and his performer role.
Director erroneously found the high salary criterion met without properly accounting for non-taxable lodging and market allowances that inflated apparent gross pay, or clarifying the per-performance vs. hourly rate discrepancy.
Completed
I-140 filed
Gymnastics athlete (tumbling) and circus/show tumbling performer
Completed
Director, Nebraska Service Center — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2020-12-31
AAO decision — Dismissed
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish a qualifying one-time achievement and satisfied only one of the required three evidentiary criteria (lesser awards). The high salary criterion, which the Director had found met, was reversed by the AAO.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee