A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not described in the excerpt, sought extraordinary ability classification after the director found no sustained acclaim. On appeal she only asserted a good reputation and requested reconsideration. The appeal was summarily dismissed because it identified no specific legal or factual error and offered no new evidence.

A self-represented individual sought extraordinary ability classification, and the service center found no sustained national or international acclaim. On appeal the petitioner only asserted a recognized reputation and asked for reconsideration, offering no evidence or argument on the criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error.

A self-represented EB-1A applicant appealed a denial without submitting substantive arguments or evidence addressing the regulatory criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failure to identify specific errors or provide additional documentation.

Self-represented alien sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but appealed the denial without substantive arguments or new evidence. AAO summarily dismissed because petitioner failed to identify erroneous conclusions or statements of fact, providing only general assertions of reputation.