A television presenter and actress sought extraordinary ability classification. Although satisfying the display criterion through television and fashion work, she met only one of three required criteria. The AAO affirmed dismissal due to insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top-tier standing in the field.

Fashion model with O-1 nonimmigrant status sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding she satisfied only one of ten initial evidentiary criteria; comparable evidence argument without demonstrating inapplicability of specific criteria was rejected; insufficient proof of sustained acclaim.

Fashion designer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only one of ten criteria (exhibitions). AAO affirmed denial: petitioner did not establish three required criteria and failed to show sustained national or international acclaim or position among top of field.

A civil engineer claimed extraordinary ability for EB-1A based on eight regulatory criteria. The AAO found he satisfied only two criteria (judging and scholarly articles), below the three required, and failed the final merits test for sustained acclaim at the top of the field.