PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
RejectedEB-2 · Other

Occupation not stated

Law & policy · decided 2013-02-19 · TSC · FEB192013_05B5203

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

not established that the beneficiary will work at the location specified on the labor certification or that the job offer at that location was valid. See in text

What the AAO decided

  • The petitioner appealed the decision to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).' The appeal will be rejected pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(J). See in text
  • ORDER: The appeal is rejected. See in text
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 (2)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    Date: FEB 1 9 2013 · Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER · IN RE: Petitioner: · Beneficiary: U.S. Department of Homeland Sccurit~· U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Offii:c (AAO) 20 Massachusells Ave., N.W., MS ~0'10 Washingtnn, DC :w.'i~9-20<JO U.S~ Citizenship and Immigration .Services · FILE: · PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced

    Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S,C. § 1153(b)(2)

    ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:

    SELF REPRESENTED

    INSTRUCTIONS:

    Enclosed plcitse ·find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your Gtse. All of the documents related to this mallcr have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please he ad'-':iseJ that any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that ollice. Thank you,

    ORQnherg

    Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov

    DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center (director), denied the employment-based immigrant visa petition. The petitioner appealed the decision to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).' The appeal will be rejected pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(J).

    The petitioner described itself as a specialized computer services company. It sought to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United States as _a software architect pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). As required by statute, a labor certification accompanied the petition. The ciirector determined that the petitioner had .not established that the beneficiary will work at the location specified on the labor certification or that the job offer at that location was valid. The director revoked the approval of the petition accordingly. The record of proceeding contains a pro peri y executed Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative, tor the beneficiary's representative. In response io the AAO's request for evidence, counsel states that he represents the beneficiary, not the petitioner. The Form 1-2908, Notice of Appeal or Motion, was signed by the beneficiary's attorney. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' (USCIS) regulations specificcHiy prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, or a representative acting on a beneficiary's b~half, from filing an appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1 )(iii)(B). No evidence suggests that the petitioner consented to the filing of the appeal.

    As the appeal Was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(1). ORDER: The appeal is rejected.