Athletics: mountaineering
The AAO dismissed the appeal after withdrawing SCOPS' favorable findings on the awards and leading-role criteria, leaving the petitioner without the three criteria required.
Summarized by AI. Summaries on this site are written by AI and can contain errors. Always read the full decision on uscis.gov before relying on anything here. If a summary differs from the official decision, the official decision controls.
Summary
A mountaineer whose record includes several high-altitude summits appealed the denial of her extraordinary ability petition. SCOPS had credited her with two criteria, awards and a leading or critical role, but the AAO withdrew both after finding the certificates and a club award lacked documented national or international recognition and that the evidence did not establish a qualifying role for an organization with a distinguished reputation. Her membership claim also failed, the display criterion was deemed abandoned, and the remaining claims were reserved. The AAO added that, viewed in the aggregate, the record did not show the required acclaim.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| (i) Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards | Not met | the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish the national or international significance |
| (ii) Membership requiring outstanding achievement | Not met | As the Petitioner has not demonstrated that she is a member of associations in the field of |
| (iii) Published material about the person | Not reached | |
| (v) Original contributions of major significance | Not reached | |
| (vii) Display at exhibitions or showcases | Not reached | |
| (viii) Leading or critical role | Not met | has not established that she meets the plain language of this regulatory criterion |
Why the AAO decided this way
- The AAO withdrew SCOPS' favorable finding on lesser awards, concluding that the summit, participation, and course certificates were not shown to be awards for excellence and that the record did not establish the national or international recognition of a club award.
- For membership, a club letter showing selection to an expedition team based on her record and technical proficiency did not show that the club requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
- The AAO also withdrew SCOPS' leading or critical role finding, stating that the evidence showed the petitioner received an award from one club rather than a leading or critical role for it, and that the record lacked sufficient independent evidence of the clubs' distinguished reputations or of a leading or critical role.
- The petitioner did not contest the display criterion on appeal, so the AAO treated it as abandoned, and it reserved the published material and original contributions criteria because three criteria could no longer be met.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 (AAO 2015)
- Onaghise v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., No. 3:20-CV-03033-X, 2022 WL 4073344 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 2, 2022)
- Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010)
- Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126 (D.D.C. 2013)
- Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011)
- Sepulveda v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2005)
- Hristov v. Roark, No. 09-CV-2731, 2011 WL 4711885 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2011)
- Matter of Caron Int'l, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm'r 1988)
- Matter of V-K-, 24 I&N Dec. 500 (BIA 2008)
- INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24 (1976)
- Matter of Price, 20 I&N Dec. 953 (Assoc. Comm'r 1994)
Read the full decision on uscis.gov ↗
Please describe the error only. Do not send personal or case information. Anything you send will not be treated as confidential, and an error report does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Report an error in this summary