dismissed EB-1C Case: Management

U.S. Department of Iiomeland Security 
20 Mass Ave., N.W , Rm. 3000 
Washmgton, DC 20529-2090 
identifying data &leted 
cle@l~ unwm ted 
 U. S. Citizenship 
~~~lsand and Immigration 
Services 
-- a 
Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
 Date: MAR 0 4 2009 
LIN 07 029 50464 
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. 8 1153@)(1)(C) 
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. 
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. 8 103.5 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, as required by 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
4~ 
John F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service Center. 
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary as its general manager. 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. The director denied the petition based on the determination that 
the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive 
capacity. 
The petitioner submitted an appeal urging the AAO to reconsider the director's decision and 
indicating that a brief and/or additional information would be submitted within 30 days in support of 
the appeal. To date, however, the petitioner has not supplemented the record with further evidence 
or documentation addressing the director's ground for denial. Accordingly, the record will be 
considered complete as currently constituted. 
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 identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or 
statement of fact for the appeal. 
In visa petition proceedings, the bwden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely 
with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1361. Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to 
identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in this proceeding, the 
petitioner has not sustained that burden. Therefore, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed.