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
INSTRUcriQNS:
Enclosed please. fi~d 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 mi~ht 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 file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen in accordance with the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, w~th a fee of $630. The specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C .F.R. § 103.5. Do not tile any motion direcUy 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 Rosenb.erg
Actin~ Chief, Administrative Appeals Office
~.u~ls.gov
DISCUSSION: The D!fector, 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 summarily dismiss the appeal.
The petitioner seeks classification under section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U .S.C. § 1153(b )(2), as an alien of exceptional ability in the sciences, the arts or business. · The petitioner seeks employment as an information systems analyst for the State of lllinois Department of Central Management Services. The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director found that th.e petitioner has not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United States.No interest from users, customers or investors
The O.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a){l)(v) states, in pertinent part, "[a]n officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summanly ·disrniss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal."
The petitioner's appeal consists of a four-page statement. The statement is virtually identical to a statement that the petitioner had previously submitted in response to a request for evidence. The director already took these claims into consideration, and the petitioner adds nothing of substance to the record by repeating the same claims on appeal. The petitioner adds no new , claims or evidence to address or contest any specific findings of fact or law in the denial notice.
Because the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact as a basis for the appeal, the AAO must summarily dismiss the appeal.
ORDER: The ap~al ~s dismissed.