dismissed EB-2 Case: Advanced Degree Professional

(b)(6)
DATE: 
MAY 1 9 2015 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S.l>epartment 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 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
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. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed is the non-precedent decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) for your case. 
If you believe we incorrectly decided your case, you may file a motion requesting us to reconsider our 
decision and/or reopen the proceeding. The requirements for motions are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. 
Motions must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this 
decision. The Form I-290B web page (www .uscis.gov/i-290b) contains the latest information on fee, 
filing location, and other requirements. Please do not mail any motions directly to the AAO. 
Thank you, 
/4J r;/ 
Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center (the director) denied the immigrant visa 
petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner requests classification of the benefic�ary as an advanced degree professional 
pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2). The director determined that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary 
met the minimum educational and experience requirements of the labor certification. The 
director also determined that the petitioner did not establish that it had the ability to pay the 
proffered wage. 
The petitioner dated the appeal February 23, 2015. The petitioner indicated that it would file a brief 
and/or additional evidence with our office within thirty days. As of this date, more than 60 days 
later, we have received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief and/or additional 
evidence shall be submitted directly to us. 8 C.P.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). The petitioner 
did not submit the required statement identifying an erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the 
director's decision with the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion.1 
As stated in 8 C.P.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summ arily dismissed if the party 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the 
appeal. 
The petitioner here has not Specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided 
any additional evidence. It has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The 
appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
1 Part 4 of the Form I-290B requires that the appellant provide a statement regarding the basis fo� the appeal that 
identifies an erroneous conclusion of law or fact. No such statement was included with the instant appeal.