dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATE: 
FEB 2 4 2015 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Securiry 
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: NEBRASKA 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. § I 153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish 
agency policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law 
or pol icy to your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to 
reconsider or a motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or 
Motion (Form 1-2908) within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B 
instructions at http://ww"v.uscis.gov/fot·ms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and 
other requirements. See also 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
��e rg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska 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 beneficiary as an advanced degree professi onal 
pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ ll53(b)(2).The director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that it had the ability 
to pay the proffered wage. 
The petitioner dated the appeal November 12, 2014. 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 90 
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.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). The 
petitioner failed to 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.' 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the pm1y 
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 1-2908 requires that the appellant provide a statement regarding the basis for the appeal that 
identifies an erroneous conclusion of law or fact. No such statement was included with the instant appeal.