dismissed EB-1A Case: Hotel Administration

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Oflce ofAdministrative Appeals, MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: SRC 08 150 5 1602 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 
IN RE: 
DEC 0 ? 2009 
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: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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 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. fj 103.5(a)(I)(i). 
mwcl/ 
c Perry Rhew, 
\' Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC08 15051602 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition on February 3, 2009, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (MO) on appeal. 
The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner submitted Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, on April 7, 2008. The 
petitioner indicated in Part 2 of the petition that the beneficiary is an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
petitioner also submitted Form ETA-750, Application for Alien Employment Certification, which was 
certified on November 7, 2007, reflecting the petitioner's offer of employment to the beneficiary as a 
motel administrator. The director denied the petition finding that the petitioner failed to submit any 
documentary evidence establishing the beneficiary's eligibility as an alien of extraordinary ability 
pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 3 
1 153(b)(l)(A). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(b)(8) provides in pertinent part: 
(ii) Initial evidence. If all required initial evidence is not submitted with the application or 
petition or does not demonstrate eligibility, USCIS in its discretion may deny the 
application or petition for lack of initial evidence or for ineligibility or request that the 
missing initial evidence be submitted within a specified period of time as determined by 
USCIS. 
In addition, the filing instructions for Form 1-140 require the petitioner to "file your petition with 
evidence that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that the achevements have 
been recognized in the field of expertise." As the petitioner failed to submit the required initial 
evidence with the petition, and the record did not demonstrate eligibility as an alien of extraordinary 
ability, the director correctly denied the petition pursuant to 8 C.F.R. $ 103.2(b)(8)(ii). 
On appeal, the petitioner stated that he failed to submit the initial evidence because he erroneously 
mailed it to the U.S. Department of Labor. The petitioner also submitted the following: 
1. 
 A copy of the beneficiary's birth certificate; 
2. 
 A copy of a "Bonafide Certificate" from the College of Hi-Tech Engineering 
indicating that the beneficiary currently passed the third year of computer 
engineering of diploma course; 
3. 
 A copy of an identification card from Prompt Personnel Consultancy Service for 
the beneficiary; 
4. 
 Copies of transcripts from College of Hi-Tech Engineering and Maharashtra State 
Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education; and 
5. 
 A copy of a certificate from Dnyaneshwar Vidyapeeth indicating that the 
beneficiary passed in the first class the degree of computer engineering. 
SRC 08 150 51602 
Page 3 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are 
aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with Extraordinary Ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through 
extensive documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit 
prospectively the United States. 
As used in this section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the 
individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 
C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(2). This petition seeks to classify the beneficiary as an alien with extraordinary 
ability as a hotel administrator. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can 
establish sustained national or international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that 
is, a major, international recognized award). Barring the alien's receipt of such an award, the regulation 
outlines the following ten criteria, at least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the 
sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
(i) Documentation of the alien's receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized 
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor; 
(ii) Documentation of the alien's membership in associations in the field for which 
classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as 
judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields; 
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or 
other major media, relating to the alien's work in the field for which classification is 
sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any 
necessary translation; 
SRC 08 150 51602 
Page 4 
(iv) Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of 
the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification 
is sought; 
(v) Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contributions of major significance in the field; 
(vi) Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or 
major trade publications or other major media; 
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien's work in the field at artistic exhibitions or 
showcases; 
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations 
or establishments that have a distinguished reputation; 
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high 
remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field; or 
(x) Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office 
receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales. 
Assuming that the beneficiary is a talented hotel administrator, the record does not reflect that he has 
attained national or international acclaim for that talent. Specifically, the petitioner has not submitted 
documentation that relates to any of the ten criteria. In addition, the petitioner has not claimed the 
beneficiary's receipt of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, international recognized award) or at 
least three of the ten criteria pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). 
Regardless, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part, "[aln 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 instance, although the petitioner generally asserts that he mistakenly mailed the documentation 
to the Department of Labor, he does not allege any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact 
on the part of the director. 
Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or 
statement of fact as a basis for the appeal, the regulations mandate the summary dismissal of the 
appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.