PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
DismissedEB-2 · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Other / unclear · decided 2016-02-16 · TSC · FEB162016_02B5203

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. § 1 03.2(b )(13). See in text
Read the full decision (1 page)

Objections found (1)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

Full decision

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

Highlighted: Outcome (2) Tagged objection (1)Matter of X citation
Decision header
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · MATTER OF C-S-&C-, LLC · APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · DATE: FEB. 16,2016 · PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER

The Petitioner, which describes itself as a software and consulting services business, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary in the United States as a business analyst. The Petitioner requests classification of the Beneficiary as an advanced degree professional pursuant to section 203(b)(2) ofthe Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center. The matter is currently before us on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed.

We issued a notice of intent to dismiss and request for evidence (NOID/RFE) on October 27, 2015, requesting evidence to establish that a bona fide job offer still existed, since it appeared that the Petitioner's business license in New Jersey was forfeited on November 16, 2007. The NOID/RFE also identified numerous issues that called the credibility of the petition into question. The Petitioner was provided the opportunity to explain these discrepancies.Inconsistencies in the record Finally, the NOID/RFE 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/RFE solicited specific information regarding 31 other beneficiaries for whom 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/RFE. Because the Petitioner did not respond to the NOID/RFE, we are summarily dismissing the appeal as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l3)(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. § 1 03.2(b )(13). Cite as Matter ofC-S-&C-, LLC, ID# 12740 (AAO Feb. 16, 2016)