Minor League Cricket Team obtains P-1 Visa approval after successful denial appeal to USCIS
Sherrod Sports Visas proudly announce that 22 Yard Cricket Club has successfully obtained one of the first P-1 visa approvals for a minor league cricket player. This P-1 visa approval is a significant win for cricket in the United States because USCIS has made it very difficult for P-1 visas to get approved until Major League Cricket commences. In this situation, a P-1 visa case was denied for a player that was signed to one of the minor league teams. After the appeal, the law firm prevailed using the I-290B process, and the cricket player obtained P-1 approval for three years.
After the denial, our law firm notified the cricket community that they should consider the O-1 visa category due to the unwillingness of USCIS to recognize that minor league cricket requires the participation of internationally recognized athletes. Since the Major League Cricket season had yet to start at the filing of the petition, the Minor League Cricket organization was the premier cricket competition in the United States.
An example of the aggression USCIS took on cricket petitions can be viewed on this aggressive request for evidence - www.oaklg.com/cricketrfe
The firm responded to this inquiry with even more evidence of how the player and the opportunity are worthy of P-1A status but was nonetheless denied by an aggressive USCIS Adjudicating Officer.
The arguments made by USCIS in this wrongful P-1 denial included the following information about the sport of cricket, the minor cricket league, and the cricket player themselves:
Please note that this is language taken directly from the USCIS, so please excuse spelling and grammar errors made by the USCIS Adjudicating Officer.
USCIS erred in response regarding the structure of the league and participation of internationally recognized athletes
The submitted evidence did not establish that Minor League Cricket requires the services of internationally recognized athletes. Further, documentation submitted from usacricket.com indicated that Minor League Cricket was only established in 2021 and that Major League Cricket will have its first season in 2023. You need to submit sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary is coming to the United States to participate in an athletic competition or league with a distinguished reputation and requires the participation of an athlete or athletic team with an international reputation. Accordingly, you have not established that the beneficiary satisfies this requirement.
USCIS erred in response regarding National team participation
You submitted evidence that the beneficiary participates in the Pokhara Premier League, which is organized by the Cricket Association of Nepal, as well as the Everest Premier League in Nepal, which the International Cricket Council sanctions. You also provided a scorecard for the beneficiary's 2019 season. You indicated that both tournaments featured several international players from around the world. However, you have not provided sufficient supporting documentation, aside from your assertions to show that these are considered international competitions with national teams.
USCIS ignores the recommendation of letters from experts in the cricket industry
In your initial filing, you submitted a letter from Syed Rasel, Bangladeshi cricket team. The letter asserted, "The beneficiary made his professional debut in 2007...He has played 13 matches in first class cricket and scored 479 runs. In list A cricket, he has played 17 matches and has scored 467 runs...The beneficiary has the potential and talent to help his team win several matches. He will be an integral part of the cricket team he joins, and will steer them to victory in all possible ways.
You submitted a letter from Paras Khadka, Nepalese cricket player that asserted, "The beneficiary is an Indian List A cricketer. He has had an exceptional career in first-class and has represented Gujarat in many domestic cricket tournaments. He has made many matches winning performances that have helped the different teams he has been part of to get titles...Similarly, he has played a major part in helping his team win matches."
You submitted an excerpt from a letter from Imrul Kayes, Bangladeshi cricketer that asserted, "Given his impressive performances, the beneficiary has been covered by a wide range of organizations like Khaleejtimes, ESPN Cricinfo, myRepublica, Cricket Graph, the Himalayans, and others. He has brought a lot of victories and fame to the teams he has represented and his country. The actual letter was not submitted as evidence.
You submitted an excerpt from a letter from Ricardo Powell, Jamaican cricketer that asserted, "The beneficiary has won many tournaments for his team. He is an exceptionally skilled batsman who has remained unbeaten and scored more runs through boundaries. His last over sixes and fours have won him and his team quite a few tournaments. His achievements have been discussed extensively in newspapers and other media organizations." The actual letter was not submitted as evidence.
However, these letters could have described how the beneficiary is internationally recognized. They only described his cricket career, including things such as how many games he has played, and how many runs he has scored. Further, you submitted their Wikipedia.com pages to show that the authors are considered recognized experts. Please note, evidence originating from Wikipedia.com webpages is not found to be reliable, absent additional supporting documentation. This is mainly because any individual who wishes to sign up, create an account, write, post, edit, and/or upload contents to these webpages may do so, regardless of his or her expertise or qualifications in a given field. Therefore, without supporting documentation, screenshots or other information originating from Wikipedia is insufficient.
In your response, you submitted a letter from Anand Patel, President Washington Cricket League. The letter asserted, "The beneficiary has also been a consistent top performer for Dhangadi Premier League, where his team won the championship title. The beneficiary was the highest runscorer between both the teams...Given his experience playing and winning so many high profile tournaments, his addition to Major League and Minor League will greatly boost the respective teams. Moreover, he will be a great role model and coach for the aspiring youth cricketers, including the U-19 boys, specially given his cricket coaching experience with kids back in India."
The submitted letter does not describe how the beneficiary or the team he played on is internationally recognized. Further, you have not submitted any supporting evidence to show that the author of the letter is considered a recognized expert.
You have not submitted a written statement from a member of the sports media or a recognized expert in the sport which details how the beneficiary or team is internationally recognized. Accordingly, you have not established that the beneficiary meets this criterion.
USCIS erred in response regarding significant awards for the beneficiary
The evidence you submitted is insufficient. In your initial filing, you submitted documentation to include an award to show that the beneficiary was a West Zone Cricket Team member which won the Vijay Hazare Trophy in 2003-2004. Further, the petitioner's letter of support asserted, "The Vijay Hazare Trophy also known as the Ranji One-Day Trophy, was started in 2002-2003 as a limited-overs cricket domestic competition involving state teams." However, this award appears to be a domestic award. You have not provided sufficient documentation to show that the award would be considered significant in the sport of cricket, and not just local to one area. You reference a decision in First Round Management. v. Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur Mendoza Jaddou, and Donna Campagnolo as supporting the facts of this case. The holdings of U.S. district courts are binding upon the parties in that particular case or controversy, but do not bind USCIS in other cases, even those arising in the same district. That said, the reasoning underlying a district judge's decision will be given due consideration when submitted, along with the evidence of record.
USCIS Conclusion on the P-1 Visa Denial
In view of the above, you have not established that the beneficiary qualifies for classification under the section 101(a)(15)(P)(i)(a) of the Act. Therefore, your petition is denied.
If applicable, the portion of the petition requesting an extension of stay or change of status for the beneficiary is now being denied as the nonimmigrant visa petition filed on the beneficiary's behalf has been denied.
If you disagree with this decision, or if you have additional evidence that shows this decision is incorrect, you may file a motion or appeal of this decision by completing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion. You may also include a brief or other written statement supporting your appeal. The appeal must be filed within 33 days from the date of this notice. If an appeal or a motion is not filed within 33 days, this decision is final.
The law firm was able to submit an I-290B filing on time, and the case was approved, marking a tremendous opportunity for the world’s best cricket players to obtain a P-1 visa approval.