dismissed EB-1C Case: Jewelry Distribution

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
i6et:*,-fi/i~r 1" ddeleted to 
 Office of Administratzve Appeals, MS 2090 
, 
 fp,- 3 - , , r, , ,I <; 1 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
T,-l-\J7: -. 
, :-c1vGb:y 
.. 7. -I,. i; , ; 
,..l 
dl. -,.>i- 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
-- - -cl (?().Fj( 
p7s)l;;iiyt~ ., .. 
File: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: MAY 2 6 2009 
LIN 07 058 52317 
IN RE: 
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 U.S.C. 3 1 153(b)(l)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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 a 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. 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
John F. Grissom 
ting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based visa petition. 
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is a jewelry distributor incorporated in the State of New York in October 2004. It 
seeks to employ the beneficiary as its president. 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. 8 1 153(b)(l)(C), as a multinational executive or 
manager. 
The director denied the petition on June 10, 2008, determining that the petitioner had not established 
that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity by the United States 
entity. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. §103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part: "An officer to whom an appeal is 
taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identi@ specifically any 
erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal." 
On the Form I-290B Notice of Appeal, filed on July 9, 2008, the petitioner indicated that a brief 
andlor additional evidence would be submitted within 30 days. In addition, in Part 3 of the Form I- 
290-B, where the petitioner is to state the basis for the appeal, the petitioner simply states: "Brief 
will be submitted, which establishes that the beneficiary is working in a manageriaVexecutive 
capacity." To date, careful review of the record reveals no subsequent submission; all other 
documentation in the record predates the issuance of the notice of decision. 
The petitioner has failed to identify an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in the 
director's decision as a basis for the appeal. Thus, the regulations mandate the summary dismissal of 
the appeal. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely 
with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1361. Here, that burden has not been met, 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed.