All Cases

The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Director found two criteria met (judging and exhibitions), the AAO rejected the Petitioner's claims for published materials (articles were not substantially about him, self-created profiles, or from non-major/professional publications) and authorship of scholarly articles (doctoral dissertation published in an institutional repository was not considered a professional or major trade publication, nor was the repository a 'publisher'). The AAO also found the comparable evidence argument regarding letters of support unpersuasive, concluding the Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.