dismissed EB-1C Case: Import/Export

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Uomeland Security 
U. S. Citizen ship and Immigration Service 
Administrative Appeals Ollie" (AAOl 
20 Massachusetts Ave .. N.W .. MS 201)0 
Washington. DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
.Services 
DATE : FEB 0 5 2013 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner : 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant 
to Section 203(b)(l )(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 l::J.S.C. § 1153(b)( I )(C) 
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 AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen with 
the field office or service center that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-2908 , Notice of Appeal 
or Motion, with a fee of $()30. The specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.F .R. 
§ 103.5. Do not til~ any motion directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F .R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) 
requires any motion to be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to recon sider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
P,on R senberg · · · · 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office . 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
i \'.~ 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center. 
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will 
be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is an ·import/export business that seeks to employ the beneficiary as its President 
and CEO. Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an employment­
based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(C), as a multinational executive or manager. 
On March 7, 2012, the director denied the immigrant petition based on the following grounds: 
(1) the petitioner failed to establish that the benefiCiary's employment abroad was within a 
qualifying managerial or executive capacity; (2) the petitioner failed to establish that it would 
employ the beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity; and, (3) the petitioner failed to 
establish that the petitioner has a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary's foreign employer. 
On April 9, 2012, counsel for the petitioner submitted the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or 
Motion, to appeal the director's denial. Counsel indicated that he would submit an appellate 
brief or additional evidence directly to the AAO within 30 days. The record reflects that the 
neither counsel nor the petitioner has filed a brief or supplemental evidence within the allowed 
timeframe. The AAO will consider the record complete as presently constituted. 
The regulations at 8 C.F.R. § I 03.3(a)(l )(v) state, 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. · 
Upon review, the AAO concurs with the director's decision and will affirm the denial of the 
petition. The petitioner has not identified an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact on 
the part of the director as a basis for the appeal, nor has it provided a supplemental brief or 
evidence to the AAO as it indicated on the Form I-290B. Therefore, the appeal will be 
summarily dismissed. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.