dismissed EB-1C

dismissed EB-1C Case: Manufacturing

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Manufacturing

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to follow procedural requirements. After stating an intent to submit a brief or additional evidence, the petitioner did not provide any further information to identify a specific error of law or fact in the original decision.

Criteria Discussed

Failure To Identify Specific Error Of Law Or Fact

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
MATTER OF H-, INC. 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 7, 2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an adhesive tape manufacturer, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as a vice 
president of sales and marketing under the first preference immigrant classification for multinational 
executives or managers. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(1)(C), 
8 U.S.C. ยง 1153(b)(1)(C). This classification allows a U.S. employer to permanently transfer a 
qualified foreign employee to the United States to work in a managerial or executive capacity. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The matter is now before us on appeal. 
Upon review, we will summarily dismiss the appeal. ยท 
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the p~rty concerned 
fails to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 
8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(1)(v). 
/ 
The Petitioner did not provide a sufficient statement in support of the appeal that specifically 
identifies an erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the decision being appealed. On the Form 
I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner stated that a brief or additional evidence would 
be submitted within 30 days of the September 23, 2016, tiling date. However, we have not received 
anything further from the Petitioner to date. Because the Petitioner has not identified a specific, 
erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the Director's decision below, the appeal must be 
summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter ofH-, Inc., ID# 477830 (AAO July 7, 2017) 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.