dismissed EB-1C Case: Sales

(b)(6)
DATE: MAR 1 6 2015 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Service 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington. DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Pe!ition 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. § 1 153(b)(l )(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency 
policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to 
your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a 
motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
T�n�ou, 
cv �lberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa pet1t10n was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center. The 
petitioner filed a motion to reopen and reconsider, which was granted and the original decision was 
withdrawn. Nevertheless, the director denied the petition on other grounds. The matter is now before the 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is a Delaware corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary as its national sales 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. § 11 53(b)(l)(C), as a 
multinational executive or manager. 
On November 5, 20 14, the director denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that 
(I) the beneficiary was employed abroad in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity; and (2) the 
beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity. 
Although the petitioner submitted a properly executed Form 1-2908 indicating that the director's decision was 
being appealed, it did not dispute or address either of the director's adverse findings. Rather, the petitioner 
marked Box B on the Form 1-2908, indicating its intention to provide a brief and/or additional evidence 
within 30 days of filing the appeal. The record shows no evidence that the record has since been 
supplemented in accordance with the petitioner's original intent. Therefore, the record will be considered 
complete as presently 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 burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U .S.C. § 136 1. 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.