Fashion model agency petitions for beneficiary model for O-1A extraordinary ability. Director denied based on falsified document submission. AAO found petitioner resolved falsification concerns and remanded for substantive review of extraordinary ability claims.

A scientist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed at least three regulatory criteria. The AAO found the petitioner submitted falsified scholarly articles, misrepresenting authorship, and made material misrepresentations about past accomplishments. The petition was dismissed and denied.

A chief engineer in sustainable building filed a national interest waiver petition but submitted falsified reference letters. AAO found the petitioner willfully misrepresented material facts by knowingly submitting false documents, rendering him inadmissible. Appeal dismissed due to fraud and failure to meet all three Dhanasar prongs.

Self-petitioner artist claims extraordinary ability through awards, membership, and exhibitions. AAO affirmed service center denial, finding only local recognition, no recent achievements, and failure to meet three required criteria. Decision also found fraud and material misrepresentation regarding biographical history.