dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

id(.iJui) lng jl:itt.l (h,':l....,lI.,;O to 
prevent ck~rh/ unwarranted 
invaSIOn ,,' "I :~nvacy 
PlffiUCCOPY 
J)ATSEP 0 7 2012 OIlice: NEl3RASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RF: Pelili"ner: 
I:knei"iciarv' 
u.s. Department of Homeland Sl'l'lIr·il:,­
U.S. CitiLcnship ,md Illlllligr:rtio[1 Sl'f\'i,'L'" 
Administrative Appeal~ Office (!\i\{») 
20 Massachusetts ;\\'c .. N.\\ MS 2()')(j 
Washington. DC 20"l2Q"2()1)(j 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition lor Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ahility Pursuant to Section 203(h)(2) oj Ihe 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 1\ U,S,C § l153(h)(2) 
ON I3EHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SEIY-REPRESENTEfl 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please lind the decision "j the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All "I the 
documents related to this matter have heen returned to the office that originally decideJ your casco Pka~l' 
he advised that any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must he made tn that office. 
If you helieve the AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, nr you hav~ additional 
information that Y()!J wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a nllltilHl tt) reopen 
ill accordance with the in:-.tfuction<.; on Form i-2<)OB, Notict: of Appeal or Motion. with a kc tlf ~h3(). The 
specilic requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not tile any motion 
directly with the AAO. !'lease he aware lhat H CF.R. ~ 103.5(a)(1)(i) requires anI' mllti(ln t(l he libl 
wilhin]() days of the decision thaI the motion seeks to reconsider or rcopen. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief. Administrative Appeals Olrice 
Ww\\,.uscis.g()\ 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The cmploymenl-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director. 
Nebraska Service Center. and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Oil appeal. 
The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act. K USc. § IIS3(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an alien of exceptional ability. The director determined that the petitioner failed to 
demonstrate that the beneficiary had the necessary job experience and that the petitioner 
committed material misrepresentation in the labor certification application. The director 
invalidated the labor certification based upon a finding of fraud and misrepresentation of facts. 
On appeal, the petitioner merel, stated that a brief and evidence would be submitted within .i() clavs 
of the Notice of AppeaL which was received by United States Citizenship and Immigratioll Services 
on March 22. 2() 12. 
The petitioner dated the appeal _, 2012. A~ of today, over five months later, the AAO ha, 
received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly ttl the 
AAO. il C.F.R. ~~ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). 
As statcd in H C.F.R. ~ 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the pany 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact ji)r tl1<" 
appeal. 
A review of the director's decision reveals that the director accurately set forth a legitimate basis 
for the denial of the petition. The petitioner failed to make any argument or submit any new 
evidence on appeal. Accordingly, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The AAO aliirrns the direct(lr's finding that the petitioner misrepresented material facts in the 
lahor certification application. and affirms the director's invalidation of the labor certilication. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.