Self-petitioner in business sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusions of law or fact, as required by regulation, after more than ten months without submitting promised documentation.

A business professional sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The director denied for lack of sustained acclaim. On appeal, counsel offered only general assertions of extraordinary ability and abuse of discretion, promised a brief that never arrived, and the AAO summarily dismissed because no specific error was identified. No criteria were analyzed.

A self-represented petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in the sciences, and the director found sustained acclaim was not shown. The appeal form's basis section was blank and the promised brief and evidence never arrived. The AAO dismissed it summarily for failing to identify any error. No criteria were analyzed.

Artist in the arts seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusions of law or fact on appeal and submitted no arguments or evidence addressing the regulatory criteria.