dismissed EB-1A Case: Nephrology

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearlY Jnwarranted 
invasion of per~onal pnll'lCV 
PUBUCCOpy 
U.S. ()cpartmcnt of Homeland Security 
U.S. Cilii'cnship and Immigration Service:. 
Admini,r"trativc Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W" MS 2040 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: MAR 1 6 2011 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
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 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 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(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, 
~~~~u-'--
") Perry Rhew 
/"Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.-gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeaL The AAO will 
summarily dismiss the appeaL 
The petitioner seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability in the sciences pursuant to section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 USc. § I I 53(b)(l)(A), to perform services as 
a physician-scientist specializing in nephrology, The director determined that the petitioner had not 
shown sustained national or international acclaim in his field, 
8 C.F.R, ~ I 03.3(a)(l )(v) states, in peltinent palt, "I aln officer to whom an appeal is taken shall 
summarily dismiss any appeal when the palty concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous 
conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeaL" 
On the Fonn 1-2908 Notice of Appeal, the petitioner checked a box reading "No supplemental brief 
and/or additional evidence will be submitted." Therefore, the initial appellate submission constitutes 
the entire appeaL The petitioner submitted no exhibits on appeal except for a copy of the denial notice. 
The FOlm 1-290B includes a space for the petitioner to "[plrovide a statement explaining any elToneous 
conclusion of law or fact in the decision being appealed." The petitioner has left this section blank. The 
appeal does not contain any statement to contest any aspect of the director's decision. The petitioner 
has, essentially, filed a blank appeal form, which cannot be a sufficient basis for a substantive appeaL 
Because the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an elToneous conclusion of law or a statement 
of fact as a basis for the appeal, we must summarily dismiss the appeaL 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.