A photographer petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner submitted evidence but did not meet the evidentiary threshold or demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO applied the two-step Kazarian framework: counting qualifying criteria and assessing final merits. The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner's work showed talent but lacked the distinction required.

An artist petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed awards and exhibitions criteria, submitting evidence of finalist selection and acceptance into a national juried art exhibition. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding neither criterion met and that the evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim required for this highly restrictive classification.

Mixed media artist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in arts, met published materials and exhibitions criteria but failed to meet required third criterion. AAO affirmed denial, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top level.

The petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification; the condensed text does not reveal the occupation. Counsel argued the petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria and that the director applied a wrong standard of proof. The AAO rejected the standard argument and dismissed the appeal, finding sustained acclaim was not established.