dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DA TE:SEP 0 4 2014 OFFICE : TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: Petitioner : 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachu setts Ave. , N.W., MS 2090 
Washington , DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an 
Advanced Degree or an AI ien 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 (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 policy 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 I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this decision . Please review the Form I-290B 
instructions at http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and 
other requirements. See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
L0.;~ R;;;; Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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 professional 
pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b)(2) .The director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary 
possessed an advanced degree or qualified for the proffered position. 
On the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, counsel made no argument as a basis for the 
appeal. Counsel indicated that she would file a brief and/or additional evidence within thirty days. 
The petitioner dated the appeal July 1, 2014. As of this date, more than 55 days later, we have 
received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly to us. 
8 C.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 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. 
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.
1 
The 
appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
1 Although Part 4 of the Fonn 1-2908 requires that the appellant provide a statement regarding the basis for the 
appeal that identities an erroneous conclusion of law or fact, no such statement was provided.