dismissed EB-1A Case: Pharmacognosy

identifying data deleted to 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
prevent cliar~~ unwarranted 
 OfJice of~dmiiistrative Appeals, MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
invasion of perscnal privacy 
 U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PUBLIC COPY 
FILE: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
LIN 07 005 52784 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in the sciences, pursuant to 
section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A). The 
director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim 
necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a statement and additional evidence. For the reasons discussed 
below, we affirm the director's decision. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are 
aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, 
business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or 
international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the 
field through extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service 
(INS) have consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals 
seeking immigrant visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-9 (Nov. 29, 
1991). As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating 
that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(2). The specific requirements for supporting documents to establish that 
an alien has sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise 
are set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(h)(3). The relevant criteria will be addressed below. 
It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show that he has sustained national or 
international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as a "scientist." On 
appeal, the petitioner submits a self-serving curriculum vitae listing his education, experience and 
accomplishments. On this document, the petitioner indicates that his education includes a Bachelor of 
Science in Pharmacy from the University of Tirana in Albania received in 1968 and "Research 
Qualifications in Pharmacognosy and Phytopharmacy" completed in 1974 at the University of Tirana. 
The petitioner did not submit any diplomas or official academic records of his education in support of 
this petition. We acknowledge, however, that the record contains a previous petition, receipt number 
EAC-99-071-52015. In support of this earlier petition, the petitioner submitted his 1968 diploma from 
the University of Tirana and an evaluation evaluating this diploma and additional credentials from the 
university as equivalent to a Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy. Thus, the petitioner has not established 
that he has any educational credentials in his field beyond the baccalaureate level. 
The petitioner did submit a "declaration" from the Head of the Pharmacy Department at the University 
of Tirana which lists the petitioner's research and teaching duties and other accomplishments at the 
university between 1974 and 1985, but does not characterize him as a professor or comparable member 
of the faculty. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that he was not given the title of professor because he 
was not a communist. The record, however, does not establish that the petitioner had the necessary 
education for such a position. While not every acclaimed scientist received an advanced degree in his 
field, it is the petitioner's burden to demonstrate that he compares with the small percentage at the top 
of his field, including those with advanced degrees who hold tenured faculty positions. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international 
recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation outlines ten criteria, at 
least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the sustained acclaim necessary to qualify 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
The petitioner relies primarily on his self-published book, "Herbal Vade Mecum: 800 Herbs, Spices, 
Essential Oils, Lipids, Etc. Constituents, Properties, Uses and Caution," and the reactions of those to 
whom he sent the book and reviews in herbal remedy journals. On appeal, the petitioner lists other 
famous individuals who self-published their work. The act of self-publishing does not preclude 
eligibility. As no peer-review occurs with self-published work, however, the act of self-publication 
itself has little evidentiary value. While some self-published work may eventually prove influential, we 
will not presume such influence. It remains the petitioner's burden to demonstrate the impact of his 
self-published work. 
The petitioner has submitted evidence that, he claims, meets the following criteria.' 
- 
1 
 The petitioner does not claim to meet or submit evidence relating to the criteria not discussed in this 
decision. 
Documentation of the alien S membership in associations in the jeld for which classtfication is 
sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national 
or international experts in their disciplines or fields. 
In response to the director's request for additional evidence, the petitioner submitted a "certificate" 
fiom the president of the Albanian Pharmaceutical Association Steering Committee confirming that the 
petitioner has been a member of this association since its founding in 1992. The petitioner did not 
submit the membership requirements for the association. The director concluded that the petitioner had 
not demonstrated that he meets this criterion. On appeal, the petitioner does not challenge the 
director's conclusion. We concur with the director that the record lacks the official membership 
requirements of the association. Thus, the petitioner cannot establish that he is a member of an 
association that requires outstanding achievements of its general membership as judged by recognized 
national or international experts and, as such, has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major 
media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classzfication is sought. Such evidence 
shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation. 
The petitioner submitted book reviews in 
 (Chinese) Herb News, HerbalGram and various 
websites, including Amazon.com. The petitioner also submitted a foreign-language article in America 
Oggi. The petitioner did not submit a full certified translation (or any translation) as required under 
8 C.F.R. $8 103.2(b)(3), 204.5(h)(3)(iii). On October 22, 2007, the director requested additional 
evidence, specifying that the petitioner must provide a complete certified translation for the article in 
America Oggi. 
 The director also requested evidence of the reputation of this publication. 
 The 
petitioner's response did not include any evidence relating to this criterion. 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not submitted the required initial evidence to meet this 
criterion, the complete certified translation of the article in America Oggi, and had not established that 
this publication was a professional or major trade publication or other major media. On appeal, the 
petitioner does not address this criterion. Even if the petitioner had submitted the necessary translation 
and evidence of the reputation of America Oggi on appeal, we would not have been able to consider 
this evidence as the director specifically requested this evidence in October 2007 and the petitioner did 
not provide the evidence at that time. See Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764, 766 (BIA 1988); 
Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 537 (BIA 1988). 
Without a complete certified translation or evidence of the distribution, circulation, or other evidence 
that America oggi is a professional or major trade journal or other major media, we cannot consider 
the article in that newspaper. As stated above, however, the record also contains two published book 
reviews. The petitioner submitted material about 
 on the website o- 
own corporation, Earth Power, Inc., and evidence that -has authored his own encyclopedia 
on herbs. The "Note from on the cover of (~hinese) Herb News indicates that 
started the "Newsletter" in 1996. The petitioner did not submit any evidence of the 
Page 5 
circulation of this "newsletter" or any other evidence that the newsletter is a professional or major 
trade journal or other major media. HerbalGram is the journal of the American Botanical Council. 
The council, established in 1988, describes itself as "the leading independent, nonprofit, international 
member-based organization providing education using science-based and traditional information to 
promote the responsible use of herbal medicine." The materials, however, do not provide the 
circulation data for the journal or other evidence suggesting that the journal is a professional or 
major trade journal or other major media. Regardless, one book included in a series of such reviews 
is not published material about the petitioner relating to his work and does not particularly set the 
petitioner apart from other authors in his field. 
The Internet reviews are not credited to a particular author and do not constitute published work 
about the petitioner in professional or major trade journals or other major media. Finally, the book 
summary by Herbalist and Alchemist, Inc. is promotional as they are one of the entities with whom 
the petitioner appears to have contracted to sell his book. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not demonstrated that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien S participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of 
others in the same or an alliedfield of specijkation for which classiJication is sought. 
In response to the director's request for additional evidence, the petitioner submits the aforementioned 
"Declaration" from the University of Tirana. The declaration lists three studies under "Superintendence 
of College Degrees through Research and what appear to be five book titles under "Recensions of 
Books and Dissertations." 
The director cited a Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary (no copyright date provided) definition of 
"pharmacognosy" as "descriptive pharmacology dealing with crude drugs and simples" and questioned 
the "level of sophistication" of the materials reviewed by the petitioner. The director also concluded 
that the petitioner performed these reviews as part of his faculty duties, which did not set him apart 
from other faculty. 
On appeal, the petitioner asserts that Webster's Third New International Dictionary of English 
Language Unabridged defines pharmacognosy as "a science dealing with the composition, production, 
use and history of drugs of plant and animal origin." The petitioner does not provide a copy of the page 
from this dictionary to support his assertion; rather, he submits an affidavit from a 
professor of toxicology at the University of Tirana, who asserts that a professor of 
pharmacognosy, defines the term as "an applied science that deals with the biologic, biochemical, and 
economic features of natural drugs and their constituents." 
However "pharmacognosy" is defined, it is the petitioner's burden to demonstrate that he meets this 
criterion with evidence indicative of or consistent with national or international acclaim. Accord Yasar 
Page 6 
v. DHS, 2006 WL 778623 "9 (S.D. Tex. March 24, 2006); All Pro Cleaning Services v. DOL et al., 
2005 WL 4045866 "11 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 26,2005). 
The petitioner did not provide books or journals crediting him as an editor. The "declaration" does 
not list the authors of the reviewed work or whether they were associated with the university. If the 
work the petitioner reviewed while at the University of Tirana was the work of students or faculty at 
the university, these reviewing responsibilities do not demonstrate his recognition beyond the 
university and appear commensurate with his position at the university. 
Finally, the record contains no evidence of review responsibilities after 1985. Thus, the evidence 
submitted under this criterion is not indicative of sustained national or international acclaim in 2006 
when the petition was filed. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alienS original scientijic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major signijicance in the field, 
The record contains a 1982 article by the petitioner published in the University of Tirana's bulletin and 
the petitioner's book, self-published in 2003. The petitioner also submitted 1983 "Certificates" from 
the Albanian Chamber of Commerce affirming that the petitioner also authored and translated into 
English, French and German, the book "Medicinal Plants." The "declaration" also lists six articles 
purportedly published in Pharmaceutical Studies. In support of the instant petition, the petitioner did 
not submit copies of the cover of "Medicinal Plants" or the articles in Pharmaceutical Studies. In 
support of the previous petition, however, the petitioner submitted copies of the cover of "Shendeti 
Mbrohet Edhe Me Bimie," published in 1977 and Albanian Chamber of Commerce editions of 
"Medicinal Plants from Albania," published in an unknown year; "Heilpflanzen," which does not 
identify the author, and "Bime Mjekesore," which also fails to identify the author. In addition, the 
petitioner supported the previous petition with several articles published in 1984 in what appears to be a 
University of Tirana publication. Finally, the previous petition is supported by 1988 and 1989 articles 
in Albanian Foreign Trade. 
In support of the instant petition, Director of the Albanian Directorate of 
Standardization and Quality, asserts that the petitioner "has been the expert that has given a great 
contribution in the compilation of ~lbanian-Standarts [sic] (STASH 1-988) for ~edicinal plants 
(Herbs), consisting of 270 Articles." The record contains no primary evidence of the petitioner's 
authorship of 270 articles or even secondary evidence such as a science index listing these articles as 
authored by the petitioner. The nonexistence or other unavailability of required evidence creates a 
presumption of ineligibility. 8 C.F.R. $ 103.2(b)(2)(i). Only where the petitioner demonstrates that 
both primary and secondary evidence are unavailable may the petitioner rely on affidavits. Id. The 
petitioner has not submitted any documentation that primary and secondary evidence of the petitioner's 
other articles is unavailable. 
Page 7 
The petitioner also submitted materials from Bowker's Books in Print's website showing that the 
petitioner had five upcoming books, all to be self-published. The petitioner must establish eligibility as 
of the date of filing. See 8 C.F.R. $$ 103,2(b)(l), (12); Matter ofKatigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45,49 (Regl. 
Cornmr. 1971). A book that has yet to be published cannot be considered to have already impacted the 
field such that we can consider it a contribution of major significance. 
As stated above, the petitioner submitted positive reviews of his 2003 book and evidence that members 
of the herbal remedy community have promoted the book favorably on their websites. The petitioner 
also submitted letters from individuals to whom he sent the book as well as evidence of the sale of 
several copies. Specifically, the petitioner's 2003 book is part of the National Library of Medicine's 
collection. The book was also purchased by Herbalist & Alchemist, Inc.; Bastyr University Bookstore 
in Kenrnore, Washington; the University Co-op Bookshop, Ltd. in Alexandria, Australia; Coutts 
Library Services, Inc. in Niagara Falls, New York; Blackwell's Book Services in Blackwood, New 
Jersey; the Book House, Inc. in Jonesville, Michigan and the University of Newcastle in Callaghan, 
Australia. The petitioner's book is also available for purchase on Internet sites. 
The director concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated that the petitioner's book or his other 
work constitutes a contribution of major significance in the field. On appeal, the petitioner submits an 
affidavit from. Dr. asserts that the petitioner "is the specialist who has compiled the strict 
and highly scientific standards for Albanian Botanicals, known today all over the world." does 
not identifl any specific independent pharmaceutical company or university using the petitioner's 
standards or provide any examples of their widespread use in Albania or beyond as claimed by Dr. 
= 
The petitioner's field, like most science, is research-driven, and there would be little point in 
publishing research that did not add to the general pool of knowledge in the field. According to the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(h)(3)(v), an alien's contributions must be not only original but of 
major significance. We must presume that the phrase "major significance" is not superfluous and, 
thus, that it has some meaning. To be considered a contribution of major significance in the field of 
science, it can be expected that the results would have already been reproduced and confirmed by 
other experts and applied in their work. Otherwise, it is difficult to gauge the impact of the 
petitioner's work. 
While the Albanian Chamber of Commerce maintains editions of the petitioner's earlier work, the 
record lacks evidence as to the use of these materials in the medical or nutrition communities. For 
example, the record contains no evidence that medical journals frequently cite this earlier work or 
that it is routinely assigned as reading in medical schools. While the petitioner submitted evidence 
that his 2003 book has been favorably reviewed in a newsletter and a journal with an unknown 
distribution, these reviews reveal only that the petitioner's book was seen as a useful tool by these 
reviewers. The record contains no evidence that the petitioner's work has actually been applied, 
such as evidence of wide and frequent citation. While the petitioner submitted evidence of a limited 
number of university and other bookstores that have purchased a small number of the petitioner's 
book, it can be expected that a book that has already impacted the field at the national or 
international level would show far more significant sales volume. Significantly, Amazon.com shows 
the book's sales rank as only 545,622. 
We will consider the letters and Internet comments below. The opinions of experts in the field, 
however, while not without weight, cannot form the cornerstone of a successful claim of sustained 
national or international acclaim. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements 
submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791,795 (Comm'r. 
1988). However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an 
alien's eligibility for the benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting the 
petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters as 
to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. USCIS may even give less weight to 
an opinion that is not corroborated, in accord with other information, or is in any way questionable. 
Id. at 795; see also Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r. 1998) (citing Matter of 
Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l. Comm'r. 1972)). 
In evaluating the reference letters, we note that letters containing mere assertions of widespread 
acclaim and vague claims of contributions are less persuasive than letters that specifically identify 
contributions and provide specific examples of how those contributions have influenced the field. 
In addition, letters from independent references who were previously aware of the petitioner through 
his reputation and who have applied his work are the most persuasive. Ultimately, evidence in 
existence prior to the preparation of the petition carries greater weight than new materials prepared 
especially for submission with the petition. An individual with sustained national or international 
acclaim should be able to produce unsolicited materials reflecting that acclaim. 
asserts that the petitioner's contributions consist of collecting and cataloguing over 500 
Albanian medical plants, evaluating the active principles in "almost all chemical groups of 
pharmacognostical interest," isolating active principles, preparing extracts from crude botanicals, 
preparing and standardizing a number of extracts and preparing phytomedicines. asserts 
that the petitioner is the only expert on the Albanian Standards for Crude Botanicals panel. The 
record, however, lacks published standards crediting the petitioner as the author of those standards 
and confirmation from independent national or international sources explaining their reliance on the 
petitioner's work in Albania. The English language "Medical Plants from Albania" appears to be a 
compendium of current uses of herbs rather than a report of the petitioner's own research or a 
scientific examination of the data supporting these uses. Moreover, the most recent Albanian 
publication is from 1989, 13 years before the petition was filed. Thus, his accomplishments there are 
not evidence of sustained acclaim in 2006 when the petition was filed. 
Vice President and Chair of Research and Training and Director and Philecology 
Curator at the Institute of Economic Botany of the New York Botanical Garden, thanks the petitioner 
for sending a copy of his book. characterizes the book as a "handy reference" and affirms 
that he looks forward to using it in his studies. He speculates that the book "will certainly be a useful 
reference for professional and interested lay people involved with herbs and herbal remedies." 
The petitioner submitted a copy of two electronic mail message from 
 Director 
of Ethnopharmacology at the Heffter Research Institute, which promotes research on psychedelic 
substances in order to better understand the mind, improve the human condition and alleviate 
suffering. asserts that his impressions of the petitioner's book are favorable, especially 
the petitioner's coverage of so many herbs, including ones that are relatively obscure. - 
speculates that the book "could be an excellent reference to pharmacognosists, natural product 
researchers, food scientists, and others who, for one reason or another, are interested in obscure and 
little-known plants." 
 recommends that the petitioner send a copy of the book to 
t Haworth, but the record does not establish 
 credentials or the significance of 
H. awort The record also lacks evidence of 
 response to receiving the book. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that a website maintained by 
 Director of the 
Southwest School of Botanical Medicine in Bisbee, Arizona, provides a link to the petitioner's book 
under "My favorite (unsponsored) links." praises the petitioner's book and promotes its 
sale, but the record lacks evidence that this link has resulted in widespread purchase and use of the 
petitioner's book. 
On October 1,2003, 
 sent an electronic mail message to the petitioner advisin 
petitioner could use him as a reference to promote the sale of the petitioner's book. 
describes the book as a "major contribution to our knowledge on the safety and efficacy of herbs" 
and concludes: "Properly used could save lives." According to Internet materials submitted by the 
petitioner, website indicates that he is a nationally syndicated radio talk show host and has 
been identified by the New York Daily News as "Radio's leading health and fitness expert." The 
record, however, contains no evidence that routinely relies on the petitioner's book in his 
show or invites the petitioner as a frequent guest. 
On May 1, 2006, - Book Review Editor for Phytomedicine and an assistant 
professor of Pharmacology and Pharmaceutics at the University of Illinois at Chicago, requested a 
copy of the petitioner's book for possible review in the journal. The record contains no evidence that 
the journal decided to complete and publish the review upon receiving a copy of the book. 
The record demonstrates that the petitioner is a dedicated author on the subject of pharmacognosy 
and has secured some praise for his self-published book. The record, however, falls far short of 
demonstrating that the petitioner's work in pharmacognosy is widely recognized in the field as a 
contribution of major significance to the field. Thus, the petitioner has not established that he meets 
this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in thejeld, in professional or major trade 
publications or other major media. 
The articles published in the bulletin and a journal published by the university where the petitioner 
performed research and taught is not evidence of the petitioner's recognition beyond that university. 
The articles from 1988 and 1989 in Albanian Foreign Trade have not been demonstrated to have had a 
major impact in the field of pharmacognosy, as opposed to marketing, such as through widespread 
citation by other pharmacognosists, and cannot demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim 
13 years later in 2006 when the petition was filed. The act of self-publishing, lacking any peer or 
industry review, does not by itself demonstrate any recognition in the field. Thus, the petitioner must 
demonstrate the book's influence in the field. While the book has received two favorable reviews, the 
significance of the publications that published these reviews has not been established. Without 
evidence of the book's impact in the field, we cannot conclude that it sets the petitioner apart from 
other members of his field. 
Finally, the conclusion we reach by considering the evidence to meet each criterion separately is 
consistent with a review of the evidence in the aggregate. Even in the aggregate, the evidence does not 
distinguish the petitioner as one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of 
endeavor. The petitioner, a self-published scientist with no documented advanced degree, relies on his 
work predating the petition by 13 years or more and a recent self-published book that has garnered 
limited attention within the herbal remedy community and no attention within the general medical 
media. is an adjunct professor at Columbia University, is a principal investigator 
on numerous research grants, including grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health, and has 
authored articles in such journals as Economic Botany and the Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 
has authored a book and nine articles in what appear to be peer-reviewed journals. 
in addition to hosting the longest running continuously aired health talk radio show in 
the United States, has published over 70 books on natural health, nutrition, disease prevention, public 
health issues, self-empowerment and healthy cooking. Thus, it appears that the highest level of the 
petitioner's field is far above the level he has attained. 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must clearly demonstrate 
that the alien has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small percentage 
who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 
Review of the record, however, does not establish that the petitioner has distinguished himself as a 
scientist to such an extent that he may be said to have achieved sustained national or international 
acclaim or to be within the small percentage at the very top of his field. The evidence indicates that the 
petitioner has recently authored self-published material in his field, but is not persuasive that his 
achievements currently set him significantly above almost all others in his field. Therefore, the 
petitioner has not established eligibility pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act and the petition 
may not be approved. 
Page 1 1 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Here, the petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal 
will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.