dismissed EB-2 Case: Market Research

" '" . 
PUBUCCOPY 
DATE: JUN 1 8 2012 OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citjzen~hip and immigration Servicc:-. 
Administratiye Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529·2090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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 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 with 
the field office or service center that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal 
or Motion, with a fcc of $630. The specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5. Do not file any motion directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F.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. 
ffiQ" Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petItIon was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center (Director), It is now on appeal before the Chief, Administrative Appeals 
Office (AAO). The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to permanently employ the beneficiary in the United States as a market research 
analyst and to classify her 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). On July 27, 2010, the Director 
denied the petition on the ground that the beneficiary does not have either a bachelor's degree or a 
master's degree in marketing, as required by the ETA Form 9089 (labor certification) to qualify for 
the proffered position. 
A timely appeal, Form 1-290B, was filed on August 30, 2010. On the appeal form the petitioner 
asserted that "the beneficiary is more than qualified to perform the proffered position and would be 
beneficial to the company." The petitioner stated that a brief and additional documentation would be 
submitted in 30 days. No such materials were submitted within 30 days or any time thereafter. Nor did 
the petitioner make any written request to the AAO for additional time to file a brief directly with the 
AAO, in accordance with the regulations at 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). Nearly two years 
after the appeal was filed the AAO has received nothing further from the petitioner. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1 )(v) provides that 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. 
In this case the petitioner has identified neither any erroneous conclusion of law, nor any erroneous 
factual findings, in the Director's decision. The petitioner has not provided any additional evidence 
to be considered on appeal. In accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v), therefore, the appeal must 
be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.