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 tl_le 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 applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional information that you wish to have considered, you niay file 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. nruY
Ron Rosenberg
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant' visa petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed.
The petitioner was a financial services business. It sought to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United States as a systems analyst. As required by statute,· a labor certification approved by the Department of Labor accompanied the petition. The director determined that the petitioner had not established that it had the continuing ability to pay the beneficiary the proffered wage beginning on the priority date of the visa petition. Therefore, the director denied the petition.
The AAO conducts appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). The AAO considers all pertinent evidence in the record, including new evidence properly submitted UP,On appeal.1
On October 25, 2012, this office notified the petitioner that according to publicly available records, GEl Financial Services, Inc. was not in good standing in the state of Illinois, and that its current status is inactive.
If the petitioner is currently not in good standing, this is material to whether the job offer, as outlined on the immigrant petition filed by this organization, is a bona fide job offer. Moreover, any such concealment of the true status of the organization by the petitioner seriously compromises the credibility of the. remaining evidence in the record. See Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 586 (BIA 1988)(stating that doubt cast on any aspect ofthe petitioner's proof may lead to a reevaluation ofthe reliability and sufficiency .of the remaining evidence offered in support of the visa petition.). It is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence, and attempts to explain or reconcile such inconsistencies, absent competent objective evidence pointing to where the truth, in fact, lies, will not suffice.Inconsistencies in the record See id.
This office allowed the petitioner 45 days in which to provide evidence that the state records were not accurate and that the petitioner remains in operation as a viable business. More than 45 days have passed and the petitioner has failed to respond to this office's request. It is noted that the notice was sent to the petitioner's and to counsel's last known address. There has beeh no response from the petitioner or from the attorney of record, to date. Thus, the appeal will be dismissed as moot. Failure to submit requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds for denying the petition. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14).2
'' ....
The burden of proof in these proceedip.gs 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.