dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

identifLing data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal priq 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
SRC 05 040 5 1049 
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 
decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
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 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. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established that he qualifies for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
We concur with the findings stated in the director's August 18, 2005 notice of denial. The petitioner's appellate 
submission includes no arguments or evidence addressing the pertinent regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). The petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided 
any additional evidence. 
On July 6, 2006, in accordance with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(16)(i), this office issued a notice 
advising the petitioner of derogatory information indicating that he is not entitled to an approved petition 
pursuant to the marriage fraud provisions of section 204(c) of the Act.. The AAO's notice stated: 
Section 204(c) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1154(c), states: 
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b) no petition shall be approved if (1) the alien 
has previously been accorded, or has sought to be accorded, an immediate relative or 
preference status as the spouse of a citizen of the United States or the spouse of an alien 
lawfully admitted for permanent residence, by reason of a marriage determined by the 
[Secretary of Homeland Security] to have been entered into for the purpose of evading the 
immigration laws or (2) the Attorney General has determined that the alien has attempted or 
conspired to enter into a marriage for the purpose of evading the immigration laws. 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.2(a)(l)(ii) states: 
Fraudulent marriage prohibition. Section 204(c) of the Act prohibits the approval of a visa 
petition filed on behalf of an alien who has attempted or conspired to enter into a marriage for 
the purpose of evading the immigration laws. The director will deny a petition for immigrant 
visa classification filed on behalf of any alien for whom there is substantial and probative 
evidence of such an attempt or conspiracy, regardless of whether that alien received a benefit 
through the attempt or conspiracy. Although it is not necessary that the alien have been 
convicted of, or even prosecuted for, the attempt or conspiracy, the evidence of the attempt or 
conspiracy must be contained in the alien's file. 
A "State of New Jersev Certificate of Marriage" issued bv the Municival Court of Palisades Park. 
w 
New Jersey indicates that you married a United States citizen, on July 24, 2003. On 
November 7, 2003, that individual filed a Petition for Alien Relative, Form 1-130, in your behalf. On 
August 4, 2004, you both appeared before a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) officer 
at the Newark District Office for a marriage interview. On that same date, your spouse executed the 
following sworn statement: 
Page 3 
living there for about 17 years now. I have never lived in New Jersey. I obtained an 
identification card issued by the Bergen County and the only reason I obtained it was to try 
and show that I live in New Jersey, but I don't. I did this so that I could project that I am 
living with him. I am sorry for this and want to give this ID Card to you so that you can keep 
it. 
I am not taking any medication and I am not under the influence of any drugs or alcohol. 
I do understand that the information I am about to give the officer is of free will, thus being 
sworn under oath to be the truth. I do realize that defrauding the government in any way can 
result in a fine and/or imprisonment. 
has been living there since 2002 and he lives there alone. 
I was introduced t -ough a mend 
approached me with this marriage proposal and asked me to help him obtain 
permanent residency status. 
I accepted the marriage proposal and agreed to his request to help him. 
I went to get our marriage photos done by his friend, so that I could pose as his wife for his 
green card interview. I have never been intimate with him. 
I have received money from him in the past and he pays for my living expenses from time to 
time. I have received about U.S. $2,000 to U.S. $2,500 up until now from him in return for 
this marriage. 
The only reason I married him was because I was trying to help him get a green card. 
A visa petition may be denied pursuant to section 204(c)(2) of the Act where there is evidence in the 
record to indicate that an alien previously conspired to enter into a fraudulent marriage. Matter of 
Kahy, 19 I&N Dec. 803 (BIA 1988). 
 Testimony by the spouse, admitting knowledge of the 
fraudulent nature of the marriage, constitutes evidence of an attempt or conspiracy for the purposes of 
8 C.F.R. tj 204.2(a)(2)(ii). Id. at 807, n.3. 
The marriage certificate, sworn statement, and other documentation submitted in support of the Form 
1-130 petition indicate that you attempted or conspired to enter into a marriage for the purpose of 
evading the immigration laws. Given this evidence, federal law prohibits the approval of any petition 
(including any employment-based immigrant petition) filed in your behalf. 
The petitioner was afforded 15 days in which to submit evidence to overcome the derogatory information cited 
above. 
The petitioner failed to respond to the AAO's notice. Therefore, we conclude that the petitioner has not 
disputed the information set forth in the AAO's July 6,2006 notice. We affirm our finding that the petitioner has 
attempted or conspired to enter into a marriage for the purpose of evading the immigration laws. Pursuant to 
section 204(c) of the Act, neither this petition, nor any future petition filed on his behalf may be approved. 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by 
the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial decision. See 
Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), afd. 345 F.3d 683 
(9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the AAO reviews 
appeals on a de novo basis). 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. ?j 1361. 
The petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER. The appeal is dismissed. 
FURTHER ORDER: The evidence establishes that the petitioner has attempted or conspired to enter into a 
marriage for the purpose of evading the immigration laws of the United States. 
Therefore, pursuant to section 204(c) of the Act, neither this petition, nor any future 
petition filed on his behalf may be approved.