Mechanical engineering technical specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Initial petition denied; appeal summarily dismissed for insufficient argumentation. Petitioner filed six subsequent motions to reopen and reconsider, all dismissed. AAO found no new facts or proper cause warranting reopening.

A micropigmentation makeup artist sought extraordinary ability classification in the arts. After an earlier summary dismissal of the appeal, she filed combined motions to reopen and reconsider. The AAO dismissed them because no new fact showed the appeal had identified a specific error, and no misapplied law or policy was shown.

An individual seeking extraordinary ability classification had a petition denied and an earlier appeal dismissed. Combined motions to reopen and reconsider were filed after the 33-day deadline, and the delay was not shown to be reasonable and beyond the petitioner's control. The AAO dismissed both motions as untimely and for lacking new facts or legal error.

HVAC and electrical professional seeking EB-2 exceptional ability and NIW. AAO affirmed dismissal of motion to reopen and reconsider because petitioner failed to submit new facts supported by affidavits and documentary evidence, and motion to reconsider lacked citations to law or showing decision was incorrect.