dismissed EB-1C Case: Utilities Solutions

(b)(6)
DATMAY 2 3 _2013 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b )(I )(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. C. § ll53(b )(l )(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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 in 
accordance with the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The 
specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. Do not file any motion 
directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.P.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires any motion to be filed within 
30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
T~ 
f_Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, ("the director") denied the preference visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal 
will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is a Florida corporation initially organized in January 1983. The petitioner states on 
the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, that it is engaged in providing business 
solutions for energy, water and sewer utilities, employs 18 personnel, and reported a gross annual 
income of $14,400,000 when the petition was filed. It seeks to employ the beneficiary as its director 
of operations. Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an employment­
based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 
8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(C), as a multinational executive or manager. 
On September 12, 2012, the director denied the petition determining that the petitioner failed to 
establish that the beneficiary's proposed employment with the U.S. entity would be within a 
qualifying managerial or executive capacity. 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and 
forwarded the appeal to the AAO. On the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, counsel for the 
petitioner checked the box indicating that a brief and/or additional evidence would be submitted to 
the AAO within 30 days. On the Form I-290B, counsel reiterated that a brief and/or additional 
evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 days. The record indicates that the petitioner did 
not file 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. § 103.3(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 record on appeal does not resolve the deficiencies in the record identified by the director. The 
petitioner does not identify an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the director's denial as 
a basis for the appeal. As the petitioner does not present additional evidence or argument on appeal 
sufficient to overcome the decision of the director, the appeal will be summarily dismissed in accordance 
with 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
The petition will be denied and the appeal dismissed for the above stated reason. 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. § 1361. Here the petitioner has not met that burden. 
Accordingly, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.