PetitionLens
All decisions
DismissedEB-2 · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Other / unclear · decided 2016-02-16 · NSC · FEB162016_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.

What the AAO decided

  • The appeal will be dismissed. See in text
  • ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). 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 (2)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    MATTER OF B- CORP. · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · DATE: FEB. 16, 2016 · APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION · PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER

    The Petitioner, which describes itself as a trade business, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary in the United States as an operation analyst. The Petitioner requests classification of the Beneficiary as an advanced degree professional pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The approval of the petition was revoked by the Director, Nebraska Service Center. The matter is now before us on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. We issued a notice of intent to dismiss (NOID) on December 23, 2015, requesting evidence to establish that a bona fide job offer still existed. The NOID also advised the Petitioner of its burden to establish its ability to pay not only the wage offered to this Beneficiary, but also the wages offered to any other beneficiaries for whom it had petitioned. The NOID solicited specific information regarding at least three other beneficiaries on whose behalf petitions had been filed.

    In our NOID/RFE, we specifically alerted the Petitioner that if it did not respond to the NOID/RFE we could not substantively adjudicate the appeal without the information requested and the appeal would be dismissed. The failure to submit requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds for denying the petition. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14).

    As of the date of this decision, the Petitioner has not responded to our NOID. Because the Petitioner did not respond to the NOID, we are summarily dismissing the appeal as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13)(i).

    The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner has not met that burden.

    ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). Cite as Matter ofB- Corp., ID# 15124 (AAO Feb. 16, 2016)