Good news — this case cleared the first bar
The AAO withdrew SCOPS' denial, found that the petitioner met three of the ten evidentiary criteria (awards, published material, and leading/critical role), and remanded for a final merits determination that SCOPS had not yet conducted.
Next step: a full merits review weighing all the evidence together.
The petitioner, a competitive karate athlete, sought EB-1A classification but had his petition denied by SCOPS, which found he met only two of the required three evidentiary criteria. On appeal, the AAO reversed SCOPS' denial of the awards criterion, finding that gold medals from the South Asian Games and a bronze medal from the Asian Karate Federation Championship constituted nationally and internationally recognized awards. With three criteria now satisfied, the AAO remanded the case to SCOPS to conduct the required final merits determination under the Kazarian framework. The AAO provided detailed guidance on what SCOPS must assess on remand, including contextualizing the significance of the petitioner's medals, evaluating media coverage relative to peers, and assessing whether reference letters reflect field-wide recognition rather than solicited praise.
What worked: International medals from recognized competitions (South Asian Games, Asian Karate Federation Championship) were sufficient to establish the awards criterion. The petitioner also had already-granted published material and leading role criteria, reaching the three-criterion threshold needed to advance to final merits review.
What failed: The membership criterion failed because, while letters from team officials described a rigorous selection process, the government's official National Sports Policy did not corroborate that the selection committee was composed of recognized national or international experts — a required element. The original contribution criterion was waived by not being argued on appeal.
Takeaway: When claiming the membership criterion based on a national sports team, petitioners must provide official policy documents or independent evidence that specifically confirm the selection committee consists of recognized national or international experts — letters from coaches or team officials alone are insufficient. Athletes should also contextualize their medals by comparing their competitive record to peers in order to demonstrate top-of-field status in the final merits stage.
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
- International medals from recognized competitions (South Asian Games, Asian Karate Federation Championship) were sufficient to establish the awards criterion
- The petitioner also had already-granted published material and leading role criteria, reaching the three-criterion threshold needed to advance to final merits review.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The membership criterion failed because, while letters from team officials described a rigorous selection process, the government's official National Sports Policy did not corroborate that the selection committee was composed of recognized national or international experts — a required element
- The original contribution criterion was waived by not being argued on appeal.
Criterion-by-criterion breakdown
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
Reversed in their favorSCOPS denied this criterion; AAO reversed, finding documentation of double gold medals at the South Asian Games and a bronze medal at the Asian Karate Federation Championship sufficient to establish nationally and internationally recognized awards.
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement
Not metPetitioner claimed membership on his country's National Karate Team, but letters from team officials were not corroborated by the National Sports Policy regarding the selection committee being composed of recognized national or international experts; criterion not met.
Published material about the person
MetSCOPS had already granted this criterion; not contested on appeal.
Original contributions of major significance
Not metPetitioner initially claimed this criterion but did not contest SCOPS' denial on appeal; issue deemed waived.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
MetSCOPS had already granted this criterion; not contested on appeal.
Completed
I-140 filed
Professional karate athlete competing in national and international championships
Completed
SCOPS — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2026-05-05
AAO decision — Remanded
The AAO withdrew SCOPS' denial, found that the petitioner met three of the ten evidentiary criteria (awards, published material, and leading/critical role), and remanded for a final merits determination that SCOPS had not yet conducted.
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.