dismissed
EB-1A
dismissed EB-1A Case: Arts
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed on procedural grounds. The petitioner filed an appeal stating that a brief and additional evidence would be submitted later, but failed to do so. As the petitioner did not specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact from the original denial, the appeal was dismissed.
Criteria Discussed
Sustained National Or International Acclaim
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
PUBLIC COPY U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 Washington, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Immigration FILE: Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 3 0 2007 EAC 05 208 52957 PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1153(b)(l)(A) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: INSTRUCTIONS : This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. Page 2 DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. ยง 1 153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. On appeal, counsel states: "The Director erred in finding the applicant has not shown that he has the national or international acclaim and prestige to be considered an ali[e]n with extraordinary ability. Additional arguments will be made in a brief and additional evidence will be provided in 180 days." The appellate submission was unaccompanied by arguments or evidence addressing the pertinent regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The appeal was filed on August 16, 2006. As of this date, more than twelve months later, the AAO has received nothing further. As stated in 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. The petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional evidence. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.