dismissed EB-1A Case: Arts

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privac~ 
PUBLIC COpy 
u.s. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citi7.em,hip and Immigration Service, 
Administrative Appeal, Office (;\;\0) 
20 Mas,achu;,etts Ave., 'i.\V .. !VIS 2090 
Washin2ton, DC 2052l)·2(ll)() 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: JUN 0 9 20U Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Benefic iary: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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 law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. 
The specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 c.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or 
Motion, with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 1 03.5(a)(1 )(i) requires that any motion must 
be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
~~\'t--
~erry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
WW\v.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petItIon was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska 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)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(1)(A), as an 
alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The director determined that the petitioner had not 
established the requisite extraordinary ability through extensive documentation and sustained 
national or international acclaim. 
On appeal, the petitioner states: "This appeal is being filed for the 1-140 denial referenced 
above." The petitioner does not specifically challenge any of the director's findings or her 
analyses of the evidence submitted for the categories of evidence at 8 c.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
Moreover, the appellate submission was unaccompanied by arguments or evidence addressing 
the categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) which the petitioner claims to meet. 
The petitioner indicated that a brief and/or evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 
days. The appeal was filed on February 23, 2010. As of this date, more than fifteen months 
later, the AAO has received nothing further. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(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 pertaining to the classification sought. The appeal must therefore be 
summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.