PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
DismissedEB-2 · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Other / unclear · decided 2015-08-07 · TSC · AUG072015_01B5203

Official PDF on uscis.gov

Decided under the old NYSDOT test, replaced by Matter of Dhanasar on Dec 27, 2016. Useful for background only.

How each part of the test was decided

Read from the appeals office's own sentences by fixed rules, not from the Director's findings or the petitioner's arguments. Each result shows the sentence it came from. The official PDF controls.

  • Step 0Eligible for EB-2Not decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

The decision in brief

Sentences picked out of the text automatically. Read them in context below; the official PDF controls.

Summary sentence

The director determined that the petitioner did not demonstrate the beneficiary . See in text

What the AAO decided

Read the full decision (2 pages)

Objections found (0)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

No catalog objection was detected in the analysis section.

    Full decision

    OCR text from the official PDF, reformatted for reading. Scan errors carry over; the PDF controls.

    Highlighted: Outcome (1)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    DATE: AUG 0 7 2015 · IN RE: Petitioner: · Beneficiary: FILE#: RECEIPT#: U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 Washington , DC 20529-2090 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or

    Aliens of Exceptional Abilities Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A)

    ON BEHALF

    OF PETITIONER :

    INSTRUCTIONS:

    Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. If you believe we incorrectly decided your case, you may file a motion requesting us to reconsider our decision and/or reopen the proceeding . The requirements for motions are located at 8 C.F .R. § 103.5. Motions must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form 1-290B) within 33 days of the date of this decision. The Form I-290B web page (www.uscis.gov/i-290b) contains the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requ~rements. Please do not mail any motions directly to the AAO. 1// . ··.,_

    I lr .,

    R osenberg

    Chief, Administrative Appeals Office

    NON-PRECEDENT DECISION

    DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be swnrnarily dismissed.

    The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuant to to Section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A) as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability. The director determined that the petitioner did not demonstrate the beneficiary . possessed the minimum qualifications for the proffered job, or that the petitioner possessed the continued ability to pay the proffered wage beginning on the priority date, nor did the petitioner establish that the petition was supported by a bona fide job offer.

    Counsel dated the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal of Motion, was submitted on March 27, 2015. On that form, the petitioner indicated that additional evidence or a brieg would be submitted within 30 days.

    As of this date, more than 4 months later, the AAO has received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly to the AAO. 8 C.F.R. §§ 1 03.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v), an appeal shall be swnrnarily dismissed if the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional evidence. He has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed.

    ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.

    -·-----··--··-- ---- ----------- ------ ----