dismissed EB-1A Case: Athletics

· 
identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarr~led 
invasion of personal pnv~y 
PUBLIC COpy 
DATE: MAY 02 2011 Office: 
IN RIO: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
lJ .S. Citi/.I:nship ::IOll Immigration Sen ices 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusclls Ave., \1.\\' .. MS 2090 
~/ashinglon. DC 20529·2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
riLE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(I)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 8 U.s.c. § 1153(b)( I )(A) 
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 omce. 
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 requircments 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 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or 
Motion, with a fee 01'$630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(I)(i) requires that any motion must be 
filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
~~'~ 
j Perry Rhew 
Chief: Administrative Appeals Offlcc 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petltlOn was denied by the Director. 
Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal 
will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an "alien of extraordinary ability" in athletics, pursuant to section 
203(b)(I)(A) of the Immigration and Nationa[ity Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § I [53(b)(I)(A). The director 
determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary 
to qualitY for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel merely stated that he would submit a brief and/or evidence to the Administrative 
Appeals Otlice (AAO) within 30 days. Counsel dated the appeal February [4,20[0. On March 25. 
20 I 0, counsel requested an additional 30 days to supplement the appeal. On April 22, 20 I O. this oflice 
extended the period in which to supplement the appeal to August 30, 2010. As of this date, more than 
eight months later. the AAO has received nothing further. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1 lev), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party concerned 
fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion oflaw or statement offact for the appeal. 
Counsel here 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.