A martial arts school petitioned for O-1 classification for a coach. The beneficiary met only one criterion (judging). The AAO affirmed dismissal because membership and published material criteria were not satisfied and beneficiary failed to establish at least three of eight required criteria for extraordinary ability.

Model sought O-1 extraordinary ability classification. California Service Center denied petition on four grounds including petitioner qualification as U.S. agent and advisory opinion requirement. Petitioner waived two grounds on appeal. AAO dismissed appeal based on uncontested grounds including agent qualification and advisory opinion requirements.

Restaurant and catering business petitioned for culinary director as O-1A extraordinary ability beneficiary. AAO found beneficiary met only one of six possible criteria (high salary) and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or distinguished reputation in culinary events, thus denying the petition.

An entertainment agent petitioned for a musician as an O-1 worker in the arts. After denial and a dismissed appeal, a motion to reconsider repeated earlier briefs without showing legal or policy error. The AAO denied the motion. The matter concerns arts-based O-1 classification, not the O-1A category.