dismissed EB-2 Case: Architecture

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
iwfLing data deleted to 
U. S Citizenship and Immigration Sew~ces 
Office ofAdmrn~stratzve Appeals MS 2090 
prevent clearly ul..rl-ted 
 Washington, DC 20529-2090 
invasion ofpersomi pivac). U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PUBLIC COPY 9 5- 
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. tj 1 153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF REPRESENTED 
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. 9 103.5 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 
or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. tj 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: 
 The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 
The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is an architectural interiors and planning firm. It seeks to employ the beneficiary 
permanently in the United States as an intermediate designer, pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(2). The petition is accompanied by a 
Form ETA 750, Application for Alien Employment Certification, which was approved by the 
Department of Labor (DOL). 
The director determined that the certified Form ETA 750 indicated that at a minimum the petitioner 
will accept a bachelor's degree in architecture or two years of experience. The director determined 
that the Form ETA 750 failed to demonstrate that the job requires a professional holding an 
advanced degree or the equivalent of an alien of exceptional ability and, therefore, the beneficiary 
cannot be found qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an alien of exceptional ability. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(4). The director denied the petition 
accordingly. 
On June 9, 2008, 
 files a Form I-290B; however there is no Form G-28, 
Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Re resentative for 
 in the record. Therefore 
the petitioner is considered self-represented. 
 states that the director has incorrectly 
interpreted the facts of the instant case and made an incorrect decision, and indicates that no 
supplemental brief andlor additional evidence will be submitted. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. tj 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. The 
petitioner has provided no further explanation of any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact. 
The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.