dismissed EB-1A Case: Business

id+opl~ifi@ d&t deleted tO 
prcveait. cimrty tnwmnted 
iravmion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rrn. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
n 
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. 5 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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to 
have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 
5 103.5 for the specific requirements. 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 $585. Any motion must be 
filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
$ 103S(a)(l)(i). 
&mflb~ 
f-, Jo 
 F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
P" Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center. The petition is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
on appeal. The appeal will be 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. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an 
alien of extraordinary ability in business. The director determined the petitioner had not 
established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to quali@ for classification 
as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
Counsel for the petitioner timely filed a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, in which he 
generally asserted that the evidence submitted "clearly demonstrated the applicant's extraordinary 
ability" in business and that the denial of his petition was an abuse of discretion. Counsel indicated 
on the Form I-290B that a brief and/or additional evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 
30 days. As of the date of this decision, however, more than 90 days after the appeal was filed, no 
fkther documentation has been received by the AAO. Therefore, the record will be considered 
complete as presently constituted. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part: 
An 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. 
The petitioner has failed to identifl specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of 
fact in this proceeding; therefore, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed.