dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
Pumc COPY 
de~tifjhg data deleted to 
prevent dearfy onwammw 
br-d-prlv8sp 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: NOV 0 2 2005 
C 05 067 50891 
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. 3 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. 
b\&eqEU 
3 Robert P. Wiemann. Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
. Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont 
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be summarily 
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. 3 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
The director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim 
necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, the petitioner states: "My works have gained highly recognized reputation. I have confidence that 
my skills will benefit the people here if I continue my career in U.S. I respectfully request my petition be 
considered again. Thank you very much for your time and consideration." 
The appellate submission was unaccompanied by arguments or evidence addressing the pertinent regulatory 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). The petitioner indicated that he was not submitting a separate brief or 
evidence. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(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. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.