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:
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. Please 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 appHed the law in reaching , its decision, or you have additional information that you wish to have·considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen iii · accordance with the instructions . ·~n Form l-29013; Notice of Appeal cir Motion, with· a fcc 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, am
Ron Rosenberg
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa pe'tition. was denied by the . Director, Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administraqve Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. · ·
. '• . ...
The petitioner is a national food and drug retailer. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United States as a senior business systems analyst-EDW pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). As requited by statute, a labor certification accompanied the petition. The director determined that the evidence did not establish that the beneficiary possessed either a bachelor's or master's degree in the •major field listed on the ·ETA Form.9089. The director denied the petition accordingly. - . . . ' The AAO issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on December 20, 2012 concerning the actual minimum educational requirements of the offered position. 1 The AAO explained that it consulted a · database that did not equate the beneficiary's credentials · to a U.S. master's degree and the, evidence in the· record was not sufficient to establish that the beneficiary possesses a U.S. master's degree, or a foreign equivalent degree, in computer information systems, · computer science, or related field. The · AAO solicited additional evidence of the beneficiary'scredentials. · · This office allowed the petitioner 30 days in which to respond to the NOlO. In the NOID, the AAO specifically alerted the petitioner that failure to respond to the NOID could result in dismissal of the appeal. 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. § 1032(b)(14). More thari 30days have passed and the petitioner has failed to· respond with proof that the beneficiary possessed the required education for the offered position.
Thus, the appeal will be dismissed as abandoned. See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13).
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 dismissed.