An operations manager at an e-commerce company claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria. The service center accepted judging and leading role. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the award not shown to be nationally recognized, membership abandoned, and the articles not in major media, leaving only two criteria and no final merits review.

An acrobatic performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three evidentiary categories. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards not nationally or internationally recognized and evidence insufficient to demonstrate the petitioner ranks among the very top in the field.

Instructional technology researcher sought extraordinary ability classification. Met two of ten required criteria: judging through peer review and scholarly articles. Decision held that contributions lacked major field-wide significance despite specialization in online distance education, failing to demonstrate sustained acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability as artist. AAO affirmed director's denial finding insufficient evidence of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards. Petitioner listed regional awards lacking required national or international recognition; translations deficient.