PetitionLens
All decisions
DismissedEB-2 · Appeal

Staffing and recruitment business

Business & finance · decided 2016-08-29 · TSC · AUG292016_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, Texas Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not established that it had the ability to pay the proffered wage to the Beneficiary. See in text

What the AAO decided

  • ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v). See in text
Read the full decision (1 page)

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
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · MATTER OF RNS- · APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · DATE: AUG. 29,2016 · PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER

    The Petitioner, a staffing and recruitment business, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as an occupational therapist and requests classification of the Beneficiary as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree under the second preference immigrant classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). This employment-based immigrant classification allows a U.S. employer to sponsor a professional with an advanced degree for lawful permanent resident status.

    The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not established that it had the ability to pay the proffered wage to the Beneficiary.

    The Petitioner filed the appeal on April 13, 2016, and indicated that a brief would be filed within 30 days. As of this date, more than 4 months later, we have received nothing further. The regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly to us. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l )(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. The Petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons. stated for denial on the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion. The Petitioner has not submitted a brief or provided a statement or any additional evidence. The Petitioner has not even expressed disagreement with the Director's decision. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed.

    ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v).

    Cite as Matter of RNS-, ID# 11984 (AAO Aug. 29, 20 16)