A martial artist petitioner sought EB-1A classification. He claimed five criteria but submitted incomplete evidence: award certificates lacked certified translations, published materials were not about him or lacked required information. The AAO found he met none of three required criteria and dismissed the appeal.

A physiotherapist sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed that the petitioner failed to meet the underlying EB-2 exceptional ability requirement at the final merits stage, despite satisfying three initial criteria. Because eligibility for the underlying classification was not established, NIW analysis was waived and the appeal was dismissed.

Attorney sought EB-2 NIW for sustainable investment and renewable energy work. Initial proposal for legal/tax expertise in private equity shifted to biogas distributor ownership during RFE response. AAO dismissed: Dhanasar framework cannot apply to inconsistently articulated endeavors; petitioner's multiple reversals prevented evaluation of merit and national importance.

A wine expert and enologist self-petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification. The director revoked approval, finding the petitioner did not meet any regulatory criteria and willfully misrepresented material facts regarding awards, article authorship, and salary. The AAO sustained dismissal and affirmed willful misrepresentation finding.