An arts petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The service center denied for failure to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or meet three regulatory criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because petitioner failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions of law or fact, despite counsel's promise to submit a brief.

Self-petitioner for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification appealed denial. Petitioner failed to submit promised brief or evidence within 23 months and did not identify any erroneous conclusions of law or fact. Appeal summarily dismissed for failure to support appeal.

Self-petitioner, biomedical researcher, sought EB-1A classification. AAO sustained appeal, finding petitioner met three regulatory criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance. Final merits determination confirmed sustained national acclaim and expertise among top percentage in biomedical research.

A writer claimed extraordinary ability in the arts under EB-1A. The AAO dismissed the appeal summarily because counsel failed to specifically challenge the director's findings or provide arguments addressing the regulatory criteria, and submitted no brief or evidence within the required timeframe.