A scientific researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider because the petitioner failed to submit new facts or identify deficiencies in the prior dismissal; resubmitted evidence previously rejected and could not consider post-petition publications.

A petitioner sought EB-2 NIW classification for a Russian economics graduate. The AAO dismissed her combined motion to reopen and reconsider, holding the bachelor degree was completed in less than four years and the academic evaluation did not credibly establish foreign equivalency to a U.S. four-year degree.

Administrative services manager seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Filed motion to reopen and reconsider after initial denial. AAO dismissed appeal on procedural grounds: previously-submitted certificates were not new evidence, and motion to reconsider lacked proper legal or factual support.

A postdoctoral molecular and cellular biologist sought EB-1A classification. Prior appeal dismissed after finding only two of ten criteria met. Motion to reopen and reconsider was denied; AAO reaffirmed that petitioner satisfied only judging and scholarly articles criteria, did not meet original contributions and other criteria, and lacked sustained international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability.