Mechanical engineering technical specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Initial petition denied; appeal summarily dismissed for insufficient argumentation. Petitioner filed six subsequent motions to reopen and reconsider, all dismissed. AAO found no new facts or proper cause warranting reopening.

Historical architect sought EB-2 with NIW. After initial denial and multiple unsuccessful motions, the AAO dismissed a final motion to reopen because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that filing delays were reasonable and beyond her control, and did not submit new facts supporting reconsideration.

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.

A beneficiary in the arts was the subject of an EB-1A extraordinary ability petition denied by the service center for lack of sustained acclaim. Counsel claimed misapplied standards and improper weighing of evidence but never supplemented the appeal. The AAO summarily dismissed because no specific legal or factual error was identified. No criteria were analyzed.