dismissed EB-1A Case: Business

DATE: DEC 08 2012 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
c.s. Iltpar1mt'nt of Homeland Security 
{,: .S. ( i!i,h:n"hip iJnd Il11tl1igfdtiotl ,\..;crvin>., 
AdminisU·'ltj\'\.': Ar~)(:als OrtilT (,\t\O) 
~O M,l""ucilllscth A\·c .. ":\.\V .. !'v1S 2090 
\\'a:-llil\~toIL DC 2()52lJ-l090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(I)(A) ofthe Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.s.c. ~ IIS3(b)(I)(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 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 1-290B, 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.S(a)(I)(i) requires any motion to be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
»0) £lrJr:cL 
(i Ron Rosenberg 
lJ Acting Chief. Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.go\' 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal 
will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to 
section 203(b)(I)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(I)(A), 
as an alien of extraordinary ability in business. The director determined that the petitioner had 
failed to demonstrate the beneficiary'S receipt of a major, internationally recognized award, or 
that the beneficiary meets at least three of the categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). 
Part 3 of the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, includes a space for the petitioner to 
"[p ]rovide a statement explaining any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the decision being 
appealed." The petitioner states: "The decision of the Texas Service Center is not based on 
sound reasoning as the documents clearly prove the beneficiary is eligible for a green card." 
The petitioner's statement fails to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the 
director's decision. The petitioner does not specifically challenge any of the director's findings 
or point to specific errors in the director's analyses of the documentary evidence submitted for 
the categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Further, the petitioner does not explain how 
the specific documentary evidence that he submitted supports a finding of eligibility. A passing 
reference without substantive arguments is insufficient to raise that ground on appeal. 
Desravines v. Us. Ally. Gen .. 343 Fed.Appx. 433, 435 (II th Cir. 2009). The regulation at 
8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) provides that "[a]n officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily 
dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous 
conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal." In this matter, the petitioner has not 
identified as a proper basis for the appeal an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in 
the director's decision. 
The petitioner indicated that a brief and/or evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 
days. The appeal was filed on July 2, 2012. As of this date, more than four months later, the 
AAO has received nothing further. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § I03.3(a)(I)(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 beneficiary'S eligibility for the classification 
sought. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.