dismissed EB-2 Case: Information Technology

identifyingdatadeletedto
preventclearlyunwarranted
invasiOGofpersoaal privaey
u.s.Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000
Washington, DC 20529
U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
FILE: EAC 06 07851314 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: "~ 2. t tttl
INRE: 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. § 1153(b)(2)
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
This is the decision ofthe 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.
~
Xbert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
J
EAC 06 07851314
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be
dismissed.
The petitioner is a financial institution. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United
States as a system analyst pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the
Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). In pertinent part, section 203(b)(2) of the Act provides immigrant
classification to members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent and whose
services are sought by an employer in the United States. As required by statute, an ETA Form 9089
Application for Alien Employment Certification approved by the Department of Labor (DOL),
accompanied the petition. Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary did
not have the education necessary to qualify for the classification sought. The director also noted the
lack of evidence that the petitioner has the ability to pay the proffered wage.
On appeal, counsel merely stated that she would submit a brief and/or evidence to the Administrative
Appeals Office (AAO) within 30 days. The appeal was filed August 22, 2006. As of March 8, 2007,
more than six months later, the AAO had received nothing further. Thus, on that date, this office
contacted counsel by facsimile, advising that we had received no additional materials, inquiring as to
whether anything had been submitted and requesting a copy of any additional materials submitted. The
facsimile advised that failure to respond to our inquiry within five business days may result in the
summary dismissal of the appeal. In response, counsel advised that she had not submitted a brief or
evidence in support of the appeal.
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(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 addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any
additional evidence. She has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The appeal
must therefore be summarily dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
_____ J