dismissed EB-2 Case: Acupuncture

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
File: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
LIN 08 080 51208 Date: DEC 0 1 2008 
In re: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Petition: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1 153(b)(2) 
IN 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, as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
+aJ- Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is an acupuncture clinic. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United 
States as an acupuncturist pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act), 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(2). The director determined that the petitioner failed to establish its ability 
to pay the proffered wage and denied the petition accordingly. 
On appeal, counsel indicated that he would submit a brief andlor evidence to the AAO within 30 
days and stated that neither the petitioner nor counsel received the director's request for evidence 
dated January 3 1,2008. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $8 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii) states that an affected party may make a written 
request to the AAO for additional time to submit a brief and that, if the AAO grants the affected party 
additional time, it may submit the brief directly to the AAO. Counsel dated the appeal April 15,2008. 
As of this date, more than 19 months later, the AAO has received nothing further. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. 4 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party concerned 
fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 
Counsel here has not specifically identified any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact and 
has not provided any additional evidence regarding the petitioner's continuing ability to pay the 
proffered wage. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.