Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and NationalityAct, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)
ON BEHALF OF
PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents related to this matter have been retUrned to the office that originally decided your case. Piease be advised that any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office.
If you believe the AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional information that you wish to have considered, you may fj.le a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen in accordance with the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file any motion directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires any motion to be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen.
Thank you,
Ron Rosenberg
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals·Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will suminarily dismiss the appeal ..
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned · fails to identifY specifically any .erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.F.R § 103.3(a)(l)(v).
On the Formi-290B Notice of Appea~ filed on October 30, 2012; counsel indicated that a brief would be forthcoming within 30 days. To date, more than three months later, careful review of the record · reveals no subsequent submission; all other documentation in the record predates the issuance of the notice of decision.
The statement on the appeal form reads simply: "The decision is arbitrary and capricious and is not consistent. with the statute from which the applicable provision derives its legal authority, ·nor is it consistent with published regulations." This is a general statement that makes no specific allegation of error. Counsel, for example, does not cite any specific regulation or explain how the decision is inconsistent with it. The bare assertion that the director somehow erred in rendering the decision is not sufficient basis for a substantive appeal.
Inasmuch as counsel has failed to identifY specifically an erroneous conclusion oflaw or a statement of fact as a basis for the appe~ the AAO must sumlnarily dismiss the appeal.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.