Polo Umpire

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirement of satisfying at least three of the ten regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability. While the 'prizes or awards' criterion was met, evidence for 'published material' was insufficient (lacking transcripts and proof of major media). For 'high salary', objective earnings data for comparison to others in the field was missing. 'Original contributions' lacked explanation of major significance. 'Leading role' was not demonstrated, and the comparable evidence argument was rejected. 'Memberships' and 'commercial success' criteria were also not met, with comparable evidence claims being insufficient. No specific publication or citation counts were provided in the text.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for extraordinary ability by not meeting at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. Specifically, the AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the judging criterion was met, citing insufficient evidence regarding the nature and level of judging activities. The published material criterion was also not met due to outdated viewership statistics for the media outlet and the author not being identified. The awards criterion was not addressed as it would not change the outcome, and the membership criterion was met but insufficient on its own.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Director found two criteria met (receipt of lesser awards and being the subject of published material), the AAO affirmed that the Petitioner did not demonstrate membership in professional associations requiring outstanding achievements by experts, nor a leading/critical role for organizations with distinguished reputations. For memberships, the evidence did not show recognized national or international experts judged team members. For leading/critical role, while a leadership role on a university team was acknowledged, the team's distinguished reputation was not established.